Was Einstein wrong?

[Kyle Sun]

To prophesy is to predict something or to utter something inspired by one's god. Magical utterance of the divine should not be intertwined with empiricism and science. Theology and Science should not be combined; the two should remain entirely separate.

I am done with this paronomasia.
My opinion is simple . Scientists make some theory with proof or without proof . They may prove it by themselves or by some other scientist . But we need to guess before we prove it .

Just like Oersted noticed the phenomenon of electromagnetism , he can not prove it with formula or certain theory.

Then Mr Faraday found the basic principle of electromagnetism and bring it to new level .

Finally Mr Maxwell explain the phenomenon with mathematical formulas .

And the other scientist used those formulas to prophesy or predict some new particles or laws of physics .

If this example is not good enough for you , you can check how antimatter is predicted from the result of formula.

 

[Aepsilons]

I am done with this paronomasia.
My opinion is simple . Scientists make some theory with proof or without proof . They may prove it by themselves or by some other scientist . But we need to guess before we prove it .

Just like Oersted noticed the phenomenon of electromagnetism , he can not prove it with formula or certain theory.

Then Mr Faraday found the basic principle of electromagnetism and bring it to new level .

Finally Mr Maxwell explain the phenomenon with mathematical formulas .

And the other scientist used those formulas to prophesy or predict some new particles or laws of physics .

There is no need for you to be emotional or react to a friendly, positive, constructive criticism, which is meant to be trans-formative. A simple correction need not be taken with disdain or abrasive verbiage, young man. The information on the opinings of Faraday, Maxwel, Oersted are unnecessary in this regard. I caution you to understand the dichotomy of the words "hypothesize" from "prophesy". Its quite elementary, actually, from a critical thinking aspect.

Regards.

 

[Kyle Sun]

There is no need for you to be emotional or react to a friendly, positive, constructive criticism, which is meant to be trans-formative. A simple correction need not be taken with disdain or abrasive verbiage, young man. The information on the opinings of Faraday, Maxwel, Oersted are unnecessary in this regard. I caution you to understand the dichotomy of the words "hypothesize" from "prophesy". Its quite elementary, actually, from a critical thinking aspect.

Regards.

You know what i am talking about , that's it . Forget about the english word , let's focus on the topic .

 

[Aepsilons]

You know what i am talking about , that's it . Forget about the english word , let's focus on the topic .

We must be thorough in our explanations, my friend. This is an English -speaking international forum, not Japanese or Chinese. Linguistics is just like Physics or the natural science field; specificity is key. To the biochemist --- an acetylcholinesterase works only on acetylcholine-specific receptors, and won't work on calcium-specific receptors et al. The same goes in erroneous use of vocabulary.

A kind correction from one who corrects students in an academic setting regularly.

 

[Kyle Sun]

We must be thorough in our explanations, my friend. This is an English -speaking international forum, not Japanese or Chinese. Linguistics is just like Physics or the natural science field; specificity is key. To the biochemist --- an acetylcholinesterase works only on acetylcholine-specific receptors, and won't work on calcium-specific receptors et al. The same goes in erroneous use of vocabulary.

A kind correction from one who corrects students in an academic setting regularly.

English is not my mother tongue.
You either abide my broken english or ignore my post .

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I am done with this paronomasia.
My opinion is simple . Scientists make some theory with proof or without proof . They may prove it by themselves or by some other scientist . But we need to guess before we prove it .

Just like Oersted noticed the phenomenon of electromagnetism , he can not prove it with formula or certain theory.

Then Mr Faraday found the basic principle of electromagnetism and bring it to new level .

Finally Mr Maxwell explain the phenomenon with mathematical formulas .

And the other scientist used those formulas to prophesy or predict some new particles or laws of physics .

If this example is not good enough for you , you can check how antimatter is predicted from the result of formula.

正确的用词是“predict"（判断），”prophesize“是"预言”的意思。

 

[Kyle Sun]

正确的用词是“predict"（判断），”prophesize“是"预言”的意思。

我想说的就是“预言”，强调单纯靠理论预知未经发现的事物或者未经过严格数学论证的定理。
这货不讨论物理的内容反而在一个单词的使用上各种磨叽。

 

[Aepsilons]

English is not my mother tongue.
You either abide my broken english or ignore my post .

It may not be your mother tongue, it may not be my mother tongue, but that does not mean ignorance is bliss. We must perfect it, as we perfect calligraphy skills.

I am not trying to put you down, but trying to build you up, young man.

正确的用词是“predict"（判断），”prophesize“是"预言”的意思。

@FairAndUnbiased 謝謝你解釋我們的朋友。我們必須始終用正確的句法和語法。

我想说的就是“预言”，强调单纯靠理论预知未经发现的事物或者未经过严格数学论证的定理。
这货不讨论物理的内容反而在一个单词的使用上各种磨叽。

我們必須始終用正確的句法和語法。

 

[Jlaw]

No, physics has very close relation with "prophesy".

We guess and then we prove it . Scientists make some theory and scientists do some particular experiment to prove it .

Periodic table of elements and antimatter are the typical example .

Theories in the scientific world is different from everyday saying.

I am done with this paronomasia.
My opinion is simple . Scientists make some theory with proof or without proof . They may prove it by themselves or by some other scientist . But we need to guess before we prove it .

Just like Oersted noticed the phenomenon of electromagnetism , he can not prove it with formula or certain theory.

Then Mr Faraday found the basic principle of electromagnetism and bring it to new level .

Finally Mr Maxwell explain the phenomenon with mathematical formulas .

And the other scientist used those formulas to prophesy or predict some new particles or laws of physics .

If this example is not good enough for you , you can check how antimatter is predicted from the result of formula.

That is not true. Theories will be constantly tested by other scientists.

 

[Kyle Sun]

That is not true. Theories will be constantly tested by other scientists.

Of course . When scientist makes new theory , the other scientists will agree or not .
The theory will be tested by experiment result or new discovery .

I do not get your point . We hold the same opinion.