Excellent essay by Karl Popper – http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html
- It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory — if we look for confirmations.
- Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions; that is to say, if, unenlightened by the theory in question, we should have expected an event which was incompatible with the theory — an event which would have refuted the theory.
- Every “good” scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
- A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.
- Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others; they take, as it were, greater risks.
- Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now speak in such cases of “corroborating evidence.”)
- Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers — for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theoryad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a “conventionalist twist” or a “conventionalist stratagem.”)
Using the not seasonally adjusted participation rate. This allows us to see the holiday hiring effect for young workers. Participation rate doesn’t take into Employment participation rate for different age groups. I’m using the raw (not seasonally adjusted) participation rate. This allows us to see the holiday hiring effect for young workers. Participation rate doesn’t take into account unemployed. If you are unemployed you are ‘participating’. Another day I’ll try to combine the two for percentage of population actually working.
Facebook responds to Princeton paper modeling Facebook’s decline based on Google Trends.
Although Facebooks’s analysis is meant to satirize the Princeton paper, I actually think they revealed a real trend 😉
Modeling social networks popularity as type of infection transmission – Epidemiological modeling of online social network dynamics
Will be interesting to see if this holds.