I don't see any intrinsic conflict in what I wrote and you wrote. Einstein did not have to imagine speed of light, it always existed and experiments with light were done, but of coarse not exactly in the same 'shade'. Some ancestry of his theory experts find in many works of literature and math before him. One of them is Dante's 'Divine Comedy'. I would call everything, what is studied, without using pure artistic metaphor - science. Boris Shoshensky
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True enough, Boris, that Einstein had in hand data produced by earlier "scientists" -- the results of their observations and experiments. And then he did his famous "thought experiments" of 1905 -- e.g. he imagined traveling at the speed of light. This led him to a theory that would organize and "account for" all that disparate data he had inherited. But, as William can tell you, the classic notion of "science" calls for that new theory then to be tested by what's called "the scientifc method" -- one requirement of which calls for experiments to test "predictions" of the theory. So, because Einstein's work in Basel wasn't tested for years, by the strict notion of scientific method the work should not be accepted as "science". But most of us feel it's nonsense for purists to suggest one of the two or three most famous moments in physics should be called "not science". All I meant to do was to call into doubt the clarity the notions most of us have behind even a very common word like 'science' -- and like 'art'. ************** Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851) _____________________________________________________________ Click to book your dream cruise. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/Ioyw6i4uHUse68C1blD6gBfBfzxWRv N4NFC8ACkUelpYpeXv4egmbi/
