New Scientific Method

Bayes, Leibniz, and Gauss.

I have written before about my proposal to understand Science. My previous view was that the Universe had Fundamental Laws, we had to crack the code and we will be Masters of the Universe. Now I believe differently. The success of the Scientific Method is based on what we have done, not  necessarily on what the Universe is. Maybe it is what we believe it is, but I am starting to doubt it. Nevertheless it is clear that the Scientific Method works; so my proposal is to analyze what we actually do.

In the seventeen hundreds Thomas Bayes asked himself the inverse question. He wanted to know not what is the probability for a coin to come out heads, but what do I have to do to know what  it is? His answer is simple, first guess any answer, on the basis of the guess, get more information, and change your guess, in a never ending guessing process. This is a subjective way to systematically study the Universe. In my New Scientific Model, it is not wrong to be subjective, as long as one has a way to systematically change the subjective view to get better fits to data.

In Bayes' time this method was not practical, one had to actually throw a coin, over and over again, until one would discover the frequency coming close to one half. For the coin problem, there were short cuts, allowing one to immediately guess the right answer: It can only fall head or tail, so the probability is calculated to be one half, with a dispersion, eventually calculated by Gauss, and other mathematicians of the eighteen hundreds.

Since the beginning of the eighties in the last century, the whole mathematical world completely changed. Now we could use computers, and nobody has to toss coins!

The New Scientific Method, heavily depends on computers. Now Thomas Bayes can have his day in court. I vote for Bayes!

Finally, the program has to be the smallest; Dixit Leibniz.