18-September-2007, 04:04 PM
|
|
Order of Kilopi
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 10,942
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paracelsus
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nereid
Perhaps we should devote several, hopefully quite long, threads to examining just what accepting 'astronomical observations' actually entails (other than 'here's the readout from {insert instrument here}')? In these threads we may look, hard, at just how much modern physics is threaded through the chain leading to a reported result, perhaps by looking at the relatively boring Section 2's of many published papers (these are, often, the parts of the papers which describe how the data were obtained, data which later are analysed, and from which conclusions are drawn).
|
I actually look forward to such threads, as I believe they'd be very educational.
As far as to OP goes, I hesitate many times to post things in the 'Astronomy' forum, as I am afraid of bringing up a point that has been brought up before (which I accidentally did yesterday), or of cluttering that forum with trivial threads. Also, if something interesting comes along, somebody usually beats me to the punch and posts it before I do. I think the 'post in the Q&A section instead' idea is a good one which I, for one, will try to follow in future. 
As for beating up on Jerry, I don't think that was the OP's intention. |
Astronomy as a science - how do ideas get communicated? in the Q&A section, is the first of these.
|