Attiyah's razor

[Attiyah Zahdeh]

Attiyah’s razor​

On finding an anomaly or abnormality in any natural phenomenon, scientists begin their attempts to account for it so as to give what might seem as an acceptable explanation. In such cases, however, I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them. Accordingly, I suggest a scientific basis saying: “Anomalies solve each other” or : “abnormal solves abnormal”.
In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly. I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

 

[Dinwar]

A formalization of the Argument from Personal Incredulity.

 

[LarianLeQuella]

You apparently shave with a very dull razor...

 

[Sideroxylon]

What benefit does this have? What problems does it solve in the scientific endeavour? Answers with reference to science history or current examples would be good.

 

[Pup]

I don't see it. If anything, they usually start with what's already known, as an explanation, and therefore may miss a whole new field opening up. Like, for example, certain diseases are caused by bad air, or foul odors, or decaying vegetation--or these invisible animalcules that live all around us--nah, by atmospheric changes, or swamp gas, or...

Of course, most of the time, that's the best method, since advances are usually made incrementally, but occasionally it slows down things for a while.

But another anomalie as the first choice? I don't see it.

 

[John Jones]

Attiyah’s razor​

On finding an anomaly or abnormality in any natural phenomenon, scientists begin their attempts to account for it so as to give what might seem as an acceptable explanation. In such cases, however, I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them. Accordingly, I suggest a scientific basis saying: “Anomalies solve each other” or : “abnormal solves abnormal”.
In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly. I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

Rubbish

 

[drkitten]

On finding an anomaly or abnormality in any natural phenomenon, scientists begin their attempts to account for it so as to give what might seem as an acceptable explanation.

And they have a several hundred year track record of success in such attempts.

In such cases, however, I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them.

Why? Given that doing exactly what you don't suggest works so well, why do you suggest throwing out the one method we have with a successful track record?

Accordingly, I suggest a scientific basis saying: “Anomalies solve each other” or : “abnormal solves abnormal”.
In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly. I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

I see to call this "horse manure."

 

[AdMan]

...I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them.

Your argument is indisputable.

Oops, sorry, I meant to say it's crap.

Attiyah’s razor​

...I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

What makes it even worse is your utterly unwarranted egotism.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Attiyah’s razor​

On finding an anomaly or abnormality in any natural phenomenon, scientists begin their attempts to account for it so as to give what might seem as an acceptable explanation. In such cases, however, I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them. Accordingly, I suggest a scientific basis saying: “Anomalies solve each other” or : “abnormal solves abnormal”.
In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly.


The basis for all physical theories must be that any idea that occurs to Attiyah, however unfounded, must be considered irrefutable truth.

I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

Fixed that for you.

Dave

 

[ehcks]

So, add extraneous complications where none are due? Pretty sure this already has a name.

Smacco's Razor.

 

[Mister Agenda]

Razors don't add things, they cut things away. Doing the opposite of what a razor does makes it not a razor. Maybe Attiyah's Beard would be a better name for your idea.

 

[C_Felix]

Please Mr. or Mrs. Attiyah, give us some examples.

There must have been something, an incident, that prompted you to come up with this.

What was that incident?

Why is this needed?

We want you to show us why it is needed.




Also, does the term "energy upon mass" mean anything to you?

 

[Sideroxylon]

Razors don't add things, they cut things away. Doing the opposite of what a razor does makes it not a razor. Maybe Attiyah's Beard would be a better name for your idea.

I vote for this.

 

[I Ratant]

More Rubbish

.
ftfy.

 

[Twiler]

Why should anyone use this razor?

 

[dogjones]

Razors don't add things, they cut things away. Doing the opposite of what a razor does makes it not a razor. Maybe Attiyah's Beard would be a better name for your idea.

Or perhaps Attiyah's Toxic Tufts of Idiosyncratic Yet All-embracing Hair. The acronym for which is of course ATTIYAH.

 

[ben m]

On finding an anomaly or abnormality in any natural phenomenon, scientists begin their attempts to account for it so as to give what might seem as an acceptable explanation.

Of course. What's the alternative? Should we look for unacceptable explanation?

Rutherford: Wow! When I shoot alpha particles through gold foil, they mostly go straight through, and when they scatter it tends to be through a large angle. What a surprise!
Assistant: Sir, this would make sense if the atom had a very dense core with nearly empty space around it.
Rutherford: No, that is only an acceptable explanation. I need an anomaly. Let's see: ball lightning? Mr. Conan-Doyle's fairies?

In such cases, however, I suggest that scientists must begin their attempts by finding or proposing another suitable anomaly in order to solve the abnormality confronting them.

"Finding an anomaly"---what does that mean? Look through the record books and find something known but previously unexplained? "proposing another anomaly"---how is that different than making a hypothesis that includes predictions for future experiments?

For example, Einstein's GR explained a known anomaly (Mercury's anomalous precession) and made a prediction for the bending of light around the sun (is that "another anomaly"?)

In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly. I see to call this basis as “Attiyah’s razor”.

(sigh)

While I can twist some of your words into something that makes sense, I don't think this is what you actually meant. I just think you're wrong.

 

[KingMerv00]

In other words, the priority in the field of explaining any anomaly must be for another anomaly.

You realize this would kill science right?

 

[Twiler]

You realize this would kill science right?

From 'Alpha Centauri':

There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn, nonetheless, for the latter.

Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "Address to the Faculty"

Attiyah doesn't seem to be willing to even acknowledge this particular debt.

 

[leonAzul]

Also, does the term "energy upon mass" mean anything to you?

You are fishing in the wrong hole, IMHO. The differences in cultural literacy and style are just too great to fake.