Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcrdcf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!darrelj
From: darrelj@sdcrdcf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor
Message-ID: <1559@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Dec-84 10:35:36 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.1559
Posted: Mon Dec 17 10:35:36 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Dec-84 03:31:52 EST
References: <217@looking.UUCP> <> <306@aesat.UUCP>
Reply-To: darrelj@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Darrel VanBuer)
Organization: System Development Corp. R+D, Santa Monica
Lines: 26
Summary: 

Basically, Occam's razor os a principle for deciding between theories or
explanations, both of which explain all of a set of observations.  The
principle says "use the simplest explanation which works".
	Example:  there have been two major explanations put forward to
explain the apparent motion of the other planets in the solar system.
Copernicus held that the Earth is at the center of the universe, and that
the other planets moved in epicycles (sort of little curliques) to account
for the apparent reversal of direction at regular intervals.
Keppler held that the Sun was the center of the solar system (and provided a
formula which related distance from sun to velocity).  In his explanation,
the retrograde observations fall out of the fact that the Earth is also
moving back and forth in its orbit.
Keppler's laws are much simpler than the wheels within wheels (within
wheels) needed in the Copernican universe, thus by Occam's razor, it's the
prefered theory.  (Now, of course, we have additional observations, such as
Gallileo's of the moons of Jupiter, which required Keppler's laws as the
only explanation
-- 
Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
(213)820-4111 x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua}
                                                            !sdcrdcf!darrelj
VANBUER@USC-ECL.ARPA