理论是解释,而非预测
理论是解释,而非预测
预测出现在解释之后
Brett: 还有另一个类似的例子。你可以在家里用一个炖锅来做这个实验。把一个烧杯的水放在热源上,然后把温度计放入水中,打开热源。随着时间推移,记录水的温度。
你会注意到水的温度在上升。只要热源相对恒定,温度的上升也会相对恒定。一分钟后,温度可能从20°C上升到30°C。想象每分钟它再上升10°C。
Naval: 但在某个时刻,当它达到沸点时,温度会停滞不前。
Brett: 正是如此。现在,如果你是一个归纳主义者——甚至是一个贝叶斯推理者——并且你对沸点温度以及在该温度下发生的现象一无所知,你可以把所有那些可爱的线条连成一条完美的对角线直线,并外推到无限远。
根据你的贝叶斯推理和归纳法,两小时后我们应该假设那水的温度将达到1,000°C。但是,当然,这完全是错误的。一旦水开始沸腾,它就会保持在沸点温度。我们在大约100°C处得到一个平台期,这个平台期一直持续到所有的水都蒸发掉。
如果不先进行实验,或者没有通过某种解释性手段已经猜出会发生什么,就不可能知道这一点。没有任何记录所有这些数据点并外推到未来的方法能够给你正确的答案。正确的答案只能来自创造力。
请注意,科学不是关于预测趋势从哪里开始以及趋势走向哪里。
为了解释水发生了什么,我们会提到粒子以及随着温度升高,粒子的动能开始增加。这意味着粒子的速度在增加。最终,处于液态的粒子达到了从其余液体中逃逸的速度。在这一点上,我们有了沸腾。
那个逃逸速度——技术术语是潜热——需要能量。因此,我们可以在没有温度升高的情况下对水进行加热。
这就是科学的本质,那个关于粒子如何移动得更快的完整复杂故事。它不是关于趋势和预测;它是关于解释的。
只有当我们有了解释,我们才能做出预测。
Theories Are Explanations, Not Predictions
The prediction comes after the explanation
Brett: There’s another example like this. You can do this with a saucepan at home. Put a beaker of water on a heat source, then put a thermometer into that water and turn on your heat source. As time passes, record the temperature of the water.
You’ll notice the temperature of water increase. So long as the heat source is relatively constant, the temperature rise will be relatively constant as well. After one minute, the temperature might go from 20°C to 30°C. Imagine every minute it climbs by another 10°C.
Naval: But at some point, it’s going to stall when it hits the boiling point.
Brett: Precisely. Now, if you’re an inductivist—or even a Bayesian reasoner—and you don’t know anything about the boiling temperature and what phenomena happen at that temperature, you can join all of those lovely lines into a perfectly diagonal straight line and extrapolate off into infinity.
According to your Bayesian reasoning and your induction, after two hours we should assume that the temperature of that water will be 1,000°C. But, of course, this is completely false. Once the water starts boiling, it stays at its boiling temperature. We get a plateau at about 100°C that remains there until all the water boils away.
There’s no possible way of knowing this without first doing the experiment or having already guessed via some explanatory means what was going to happen. No method of recording all of these data points and extrapolating off into the future could ever have given you the correct answer. The correct answer can only come from creativity.
Notice that science is not about predicting where the trend starts and where the trend goes.
To explain what’s going on with the water, we’d refer to the particles and how, as the temperature increases, the kinetic energy of the particles starts to increase. This means the velocity of the particles is increasing. Eventually, particles in the liquid state achieve escape velocity from the rest of the liquid. At this point, we have boiling.
That escape velocity—the technical term is latent heat—requires energy. For this reason, we can have heating of water without a temperature increase.
That’s what science is, that whole complicated story about how the particles are moving faster. It’s not about trends and predictions; it’s about explanations.
Only once we have the explanation can we make the prediction.