[gomaaa]

Einstein's observations were his thought experiments.

He used thought experiments to test his theoretical whims in his head, but his final conclusions were thorooughly tested by ASTRONOMICAL observation.

Also, Rach, will you please comment on what you think the fundamental differnce is between experiment and observation. I, and several others, contend that experimentation is merely observation in a slightly more controled condition. The stuff that goes on in the lab is no different than what happens in the real world. That's the whole point!

[Rachumlakenschlaff]

Also, Rach, will you please comment on what you think the fundamental differnce is between experiment and observation. I, and several others, contend that experimentation is merely observation in a slightly more controled condition. The stuff that goes on in the lab is no different than what happens in the real world. That's the whole point

Once again, thank you for your civility.

If I may, I think the fundamental disagreement is between experimentation and prediction. Observations are used to test both. The crucial part of experimentation that is lacking in mere prediction is control of the variables. Moreover, experimentation almost always leads the experimenter to the realization that there are variables that need to be controlled that he never considered or even knew about before he did the experiment.

So, in your phraseology, i would say that experimentation is observation under controlled conditions. But, I would disagree that it is "slightly more controlled". I contend that, in general, observations of mere predictions are entirely uncontrolled.

I look forward to your dialog.

[bondserv]

scientific theories make testable predictions and are given up when they fail their tests.

How do you fail an observation?

You can have a failed experiment that included observations.

You can fail a test that is part of an experiment.

When you test something you are engaging in an experiment.