• KevonLooney
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 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.