Since this is a digression, I'll make it brief. This is not exactly how
the scientific method works. The secientific method goes somewhat as
follows. A theory is developed based on the best current understanding.
>From this theory, predictions are made (the "theoretical part of the
science"). These predictions then become the basis of experiments to
validate or disprove the predictions. The results of these experiments are
used to either dismiss the theory or to refine the theory.
There is a real risk with "seat of the trousers science" to trod a long way
down the wrong path. This happened in physics in the 18th and 19th
century. Physicist at the time could not accept that there was not a
reference frame for light similar to what air is for sound. This lead to
the metaphysical "ether" which had to be there. This theory (with no
scientific basis) was pushed for years until the concept was completely
disproved by the famous Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887. The theory of
electro-magnatism was in total chaos for almost 20 years until Einstein's
postulates in 1905.
The effect known as the aberration of light was discovered in 1727 and was
in itself disproof of the ether theroy of light transmission, but very few
would accept it since it disagreed with the gods of Newton. This resulted
in almost 200 years of the Newton religion replacing good physics.
Truman
Truman Prevatt
Sarasota, FL