[Advaita-l] Science & Consistency

Yuvaraj Athur Raghuvir yuvaraj.a.r at gmail.com
Tue Aug 25 08:13:12 CDT 2009


Science as I know it is largely consistent. However there are
paradoxes (like EPR, Schrodinger's cat, etc) which are indications of
potential inconsistencies in the theories so far proposed. Paradoxes
pushes understanding further since that is when new theories replace
older ones to explain  the observed phenomena.

However, from my understanding of Goedel's work in logic, a consistent
logical system cannot prove all true statements. This means that there
can exist statements that are true but not provably true. To me,
scientific explaination is at the level of proof. And thus in a
consistent scientific theory, I would expect incompleteness.

Hope this helps,

On 8/24/09, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Mahesh Ursekar wrote:
>> Hi All:
>> Is science logically consistent? By which I mean, is the understanding of
>> a
>> concept in one branch of science used consistently in every other branch?
> Hmm perhaps this question might get a better answer in a philosophy of
> science list but my understanding is this.  While the fundemental
> underpinnings of science aren't 100% settled yet, most scientists have
> hope that they can be.
> Or I have heard it put this way: All of biology is a branch of chemistry,
> all
> of chemistry is a branch of physics, and all of physics is a branch of
> mathematics!
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list