Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong

2007-03-15T14:31:55Z

Wpic:

[[Image:X_mark.jpg|200px|right]]

This is a special case of [[circular reasoning]] in which the person tries to disprove a point of view by interpreting the facts through a different view. The logical structure of such an argument is:

# Fact '''A''' is interpreted by theory ''T'' as '''a'''.
# Interpretation '''a''' conflicts with theory ''U''.
# Therefore ''U'' is assumed to be wrong.

However:
# '''A''' is interpreted by theory ''U'' as '''b'''.
# Interpretation '''b''' is consistent with view ''U''.

Monkey Law states that in such a case, the holder of Theory ''U'' could as easily use that argument against the holder of Theory ''T''--and the proponent of Theory ''T'' would have no just cause to challenge that argument. (To do so would constitute [[special pleading]].)

In challenging a theory, one must not confuse the ''interpretation'' of a fact with the fact itself. Different theories infer different things from the same facts. Rejecting a theory out-of-hand merely because it infers things that your theory would not infer, is not logical and is not good [[science]]. The proper way to challenge an opposing theory is:

# To attempt to show that the theory is not self-consistent--i.e., that it leads to [[Logical fallacy#Contradiction|contradictions]], or failing that,
# To show that the opposing theory infers a given proposition, and then to show definitively that that proposition is contrary to fact. For example, the [[phlogiston]] theory of fire held that a flammable substance always contained another substance, called "phlogiston," that actually burned. [[Antoine Lavoisier]] demonstrated a combustion reaction in which the solid products clearly weighed ''more'' than the initial fuel, a thing that the phlogiston theory could not possibly explain.

== Reference ==
<table style="border:1px solid #AAAAAA; background: #EDF1F1; float:right; width:100px; margin-left:15px;">
<tr><td>{{fallacy|Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong}}
<tr><td>Use the <nowiki>{{fallacy|Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong}}</nowiki> template to insert the above warning on a page containing an argument that essentially says, ''Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong''. The template links the warning label to this page.
</table>
* [http://creationwiki.org/Your_theory_does_not_work_under_my_theory,_so_your_theory_must_be_wrong Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong] by [[CreationWiki]]

== See Also ==
* [[Logical fallacy]]

[[Category:Philosophy]]

First Law of Thermodynamics

2007-03-15T14:30:07Z

Wpic:

The First Law of Thermodynamics is that the increase in internal energy of a closed system equals the amount of heat energy added minus the work performed by the system.

Mathematically, this is described as follows:

:<math>\mathrm{d}U=\delta Q-\delta W\,</math>

where <math>\mathrm{d}U</math> is the infinitesimal increase in the internal energy, <math>\delta Q</math> is the infinitesimal amount of heat added, and <math>\delta W</math> is the infinitesimal amount of work performed.

Note that if no energy is added, then the maximum amount of work that can be performed by the system is equal to its initial energy. This prevents the existence of a type of [[perpetual motion machine]], along with preventing fractiation in the monkey.

Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong

First Law of Thermodynamics