I'm curious, why would you put that in quotes?
I put that in quotes because people don't talk about "true science". They talk about science. Is Einstein's theory of relativity true? No, physicists know it is not true. It contradicts quantum mechanics. So the search is on for a better theory. Are theories ever proven in science? No. All you can do is collect data that supports a theory or contradicts the theory.
When you took a physics lab in college, did you ever state in your lab reports that you proved a theory? No, all you could do is test a theory by collecting data. You took several measurements with some degree of error and arrived at an average with some degree of error. Then you used a discrepancy test with some figure of error to compare the experimental results you obtained with the theoretical predictions. If the two calculations came within some tolerance with stated figure of error, then you could state the the experimental date supported the theory, but you never stated that the experimental results proved the theory. Inductive reasoning is never a proof. So it seemed odd to me that you wrote about "true science".
Only if we were geniuses to begin with.
Exactly. I was waiting patiently for you to say that. Geniuses are born geniuses. How do you explain that with science?
When you took a physics lab in college, did you ever state in your lab reports that you proved a theory? No, all you could do is test a theory by collecting data. You took several measurements with some degree of error and arrived at an average with some degree of error. Then you used a discrepancy test with some figure of error to compare the experimental results you obtained with the theoretical predictions. If the two calculations came within some tolerance with stated figure of error, then you could state the the experimental date supported the theory, but you never stated that the experimental results proved the theory. Inductive reasoning is never a proof. So it seemed odd to me that you wrote about "true science".
Please re-read the thread. You used the phrase "true science" first...not me.
What I did say was this: "Just imagine if he'd devoted his later life to real science, though." I'll stand by that. Newton spent his latter years writing 650,000 words on alchemy. Chemistry has its roots in alchemy, just as astronomy has its roots in astrology. But astrology isn't real science, and neither is alchemy. They are both pseudosciences.
Do you disagree?
Geniuses are born geniuses. How do you explain that with science
The same way I would explain how some people are born with the ability to run more quickly or lift heavy weights...genetics (and training). What other explanation would there possibly be?
For anyone wondering, I think stripes1776 is talking about the "Theory of Everything". (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)
My head starts to hurt when quantum mechanics is talked about. Anything beyond the level of pop sci books by Michio Kaku and I become a blithering idiot.