Science

[rhohf@eagle.idcnet.com]

I have been reading the discussions of action-related issues with great
interest.  Up to now all my computer time has been occupied by reading and
sorting the volume of information generated by this forum, but when time
allows, I will submit a discription of my own (somewhat divergent) model which
I have devised to describe action phenomena.

In the meantime, I have noticed a number of references to the "scientific"
investigations which have been taking place.  I would like to suggest that the
investigations described are not scientific.  The goal of science is to
describe the universe in terms of >reproducible< phenomena.  This means
reproducible in other places by other people.  The fact that there does not
seem to be a consensus on even the most elementary observations of actions
would indicate that the reproducibility requirement is not being met.

There is another requirement of the "scientific method" which is apparently
not being met:  the >isolation of variables<.  This means, "Measure one thing
while everything else remains unchanged," and is, perhaps, the most
fundamental principle of the scientific method. Some reflection on this point
will indicate that science presents a very skewed view of the universe; there
are many things (perhaps including piano actions) which simply have too many
variables to isolate and measure them. Thus, the scientific method is more
useful for some things than for others.  Attempts to employ the scientific
method improperly result in descriptions of >special cases< with little or no
general application.  It may be that every piano ever made is its own special
case. Solving action problems to the extent of producing consistent and
predictable results may require seeing through the mounds of data to a deeper
level of understanding.

Bob Hohf