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