this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
67 points (86.8% liked)

science

14762 readers
459 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You took that from the page titled "Discovery (observation)". Of course it says that discovery requires observation.

Here's a more nuanced view:

Scientific discovery is the process or product of successful scientific inquiry. Objects of discovery can be things, events, processes, causes, and properties as well as theories and hypotheses and their features (their explanatory power, for example).

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-discovery/

So it can refer to either the thing itself or to the theory that explains it. Using your definition, theoretical scientists could never "discover" anything.

We say Einstein "discovered" general relativity, even though he was a theoretical physicist, and never physically observed anything first.

[–] forwardvoid@feddit.nl 1 points 9 months ago

Fair point about my source and statement. The main issue I have with your earlier statement is that you say “realizing and describing” equals discovering.
A proper theory at least needs some proof, be it purely theoretical. Otherwise one could argue that people discovered flat earth, there’s plenty of descriptions on how it works floating around. Having purely theoretical proof also means I do not agree that theoretical physicists can not discover things. Einsteins discoveries were all substantiated by rigorous mathematical proofs.