Slitherine

quote:


"I have a stealth fighter jet in my hangar"

Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of radar invisibility technology over the decades, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my hangar. You look inside and see a ladder, empty barrels of fuel, an old APU -- but no Fighter Jet.

"Where's the aircraft?" you ask.

"Oh, it's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that it's an invisible aircraft."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the hanger to capture the fighter jet wheel prints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this fighter aircraft floats in the air."

You can start the engine, then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible heat of the running engine.

"Good idea, but the invisible engine is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the fighter aircraft and make it visible.

"Good idea, but it's an incorporeal fighter jet and the paint won't stick."

Well, you can show me radar signature from your tests.
"Good idea, but this information is classified."

And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.
Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating fighter jet aircraft which has heatless engine and no fighter jet at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my fighter jet exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.

Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China