"Tony Raven" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<
[email protected]>...
> The difference between science and dogma is science seeks to challenge a theory which is
> strengthened or dismissed on its ability to meet those challenges.
Ok then, have a go at challenging it. But let's stick to the scientific method, and avoid simply
saying "I don't believe it". _Why_ don't you believe it? There are essentially two aspects to the
failure, the slipping and the unscrewing. Both are predicted by elementary theory, both have been
repeatedly observed. I'm at a loss to see what more you can need. If it's just a matter of the time
it takes you to get your head round the idea, that's fair enough and I'm sorry I was a bit short. It
is a bit incredible to believe that all the major manufacturers can have made this mistake. I
suspect that the problem must have been properly considered a long time ago, but a combination of
corporate memory loss and erroneous copying of designs has brought us to the current situation.
The ultimate test of a theory is its ability to predict future outcomes, because that enables it to
be falsified or validated. In my opinion it predicted Spaceman Spiff's experience rather well
(quoted on my page). This anecdote was not one of the ones that I drew on when dreaming up my ideas,
it only happened a couple of weeks ago and you can therefore treat it as an independent data point
for validation.
James