RE: standard of evidence
October 3, 2013 at 8:48 am
(This post was last modified: October 3, 2013 at 9:35 am by Chas.)
(October 2, 2013 at 9:56 am)Rational AKD Wrote: there is also no way to show someone a quark, but does that mean we shouldn't believe in them?
"One of the definitive experiments which supports the quark model is the high energy annihilation of electrons and positrons. The annihilation can produce muon-antimuon pairs or quark-antiquark pairs which in turn produce hadrons. The hadron events are evidence of quark production. The ratio of the number of hadron events to the number of muon events gives a measure of the number of "colors" of the quarks, and the evidence points to five quarks with three colors. With the more recent evidence for the top quark, these experiments provide support for the standard model of six quarks with three colors. "
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hba...qevid.html
This is called evidence.
You can continue to play silly buggers with "standards of evidence", but that's not the way it works.
Present your evidence and it will be evaluated. That's the way it works.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.