ThesisPDF Available

Description & summary of one of the biggest mistakes researchers must avoid (or never repeat) at any cost

Authors:
  • http://www.pioneer-soft.com

Abstract

The Body of Knowledge (or “BoK”) for any scientific or engineering discipline is as good as our understanding and validity of the facts at the core (or the very foundation) of the BoK. Having flawed facts (i.e. flawed beliefs considered to be self-evident facts) corrupts the BoK (e.g. concepts, observations and derived facts) created by relying on the flawed facts. Anything can be a fact, if and only if, it is proven by using demonstrable, repeatable and falsifiable proof backed by sound evidence and if it is impossible to falsify the proof and evidence. Nothing else must be treated or considered as fact, for example to rely on it to expand the BoK. Everything else must be treated and clearly documented as an assumption, that must be validated (if and when it is possible to validate). Having flawed fact (i.e. the Earth is static) at the core of the basic sciences resulted in geocentric paradox and scientific crisis. Having flawed facts in the foundation of computer science resulted in the existing software crisis. Isn’t it common sense: Relying on flawed facts (or wrong assumptions) diverts any research effort or even investigation into a wrong path. This kind of mistakes diverted the research effort and hard work of hundreds of thousands of software researchers into a wrong path and the effort resulted in huge chunks of corrupted BoK created by pursuing fool’s errand in the wrong path. Such biggest mistakes must be avoided at any cost and if such mistake already committed, it must be detected and removed quickly.
Description & summary of one of the biggest mistakes
researchers must avoid (or never repeat) at any cost
The researchers of any scientific and engineering discipline must never
repeat this kind of mistake at any cost: Relying on undocumented or untested
belief (or opinion) at any cost by insisting or concluding the belief is a self-evident
fact. The researchers of basic sciences committed this kind of mistake more than
2000 years ago by believing that: “the Earth is static” is a self-evident fact (i.e. they
insisted that the belief needs neither proof nor documenting it as an assumption).
The researchers relied on the belief for advancing mankind’s body of knowledge
for about 1600 years, which resulted in a complex geocentric paradox. The basic
sciences ended up in a huge scientific crisis by 16th century.
Many 16th and 17th century researchers such as Galileo and others had to
endure a huge pain and suffering for exposing the huge error (i.e. flawed belief
considered to be a self-evident fact). Exposing the error resulted in the greatest
scientific revolution in the history. During the scientific revolution, the researchers
learned invaluable lessons, particularly (due to the pain and suffering) they had
experienced harsh consequences first-hand and gained valuable insights to
realize about: Why and how It is a huge mistake to rely on undocumented or
unproven beliefs (e.g. by concluding such beliefs are self-evident facts).
The scientific processes and principles were formulated and formalized
during the greatest scientific revolution (i.e. when the error at the root of geocentric
paradigm was exposed in the 17th century by enduring huge pain and suffering) to
avoid repeating of such kind of mistake again at any cost. Of course, researchers
may rely on documented beliefs (or assumptions) for proposing hypothesis to
investigate or explore scientific or technological frontiers to discover new facts to
expand the body of knowledge, but it is a blatant violation of the scientific process
to not documenting any such belief as an assumption.
In real science there are no self-evident facts. That is, nothing can be
treated as a fact (e.g. to rely on it as a fact) until it is proven. Hence, even a fact
(i.e. widely accepted to be self-evident) must be documented as an assumption,
until it is proven by documented proof backed by evidence. The proof must be
clearly documented and publicly available, so that the proof can be falsified (e.g.
any time in the future as technology advances over time), if and when new
demonstrable anomaly or contradicting evidence is surfaces or discovered.
Any unproven belief or assumption must be clearly document before relying
on it. Documenting any assumption keeps the assumption on the radar of
researchers, so that (i) successive generations of researcher in the future (e.g.
impressionable young researchers or even students who are going to be
researchers) know that the assumption must be validated, if and when possible,
and (ii) researchers clearly know that it is not yet a fact. Each of the other
researchers must be clearly informed that he is taking risk by relying on an
unproven assumption & his efforts would be wasted, if the assumption is flawed.
No scientific or engineering discipline can afford to repeat such huge
mistake. Unfortunately, few experts confuse between these 2 completely different
kind of things (1) relying on documented beliefs or assumptions by a hypothesis
for exploring un-chartered frontiers for expanding the boundaries of body of
knowledge, and (2) having undocumented or unproven beliefs at the very core or
root of a mature body of knowledge, which has been evolving by relying on such
beliefs for many decades or centuries (e.g. by treating the beliefs to be self-evident
facts). It is a mistake to compare or justify the unjustifiable second kind of beliefs
by using the justifiable first kind of beliefs as an excuse or reference.
Relying on documented beliefs for exploring new un-chartered frontiers is
not a violation/mistake it is widely used and proven method for research. But
having undocumented or unproven belief at the very core/root or as foundation of
a mature body of knowledge and relying on such belief (by insisting it to be self-
evident fact) makes the whole body of knowledge flawed and invalid. For example,
whole geocentric paradigm evolved for 1600 years ended up invalid.
The 17th century philosophers learned valuable lessons and insights from
the pain and suffering. Because the 17th century philosophers experienced the
huge pain and suffering for exposing such error, the scientific processes and
principles were formulated and formalized during the scientific revolution (e.g. by
great 17th century philosophers including Galileo & Descartes to name a couple),
to particularly prevent such mistake: relying on undocumented and untested
beliefs by blindly insisting that the unproven beliefs are self-evident facts.
Scientists must never forget Descartes famous quote “I think, therefore I
am”. This shows his intent To prevent such mistake (i.e. relying on any belief,
even if it is considered as a self-evident fact) at any cost. Nothing can be a fact,
until it is proven by using a documented proof. Dr. Popper’s view: A fact in the
empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified. Hence the proof
and evidence for any fact must be documented, so that it can be falsified. Proof
for any fact must be falsifiable, which doesn’t mean the proof is flawed, but the
proof (and supporting evidence) can be falsified, if there is a flaw (i.e. by finding
the flaw by any one at any time in the future). Any fact can no longer be a fact, if
and when its proof is falsified by demonstrating a flaw.
Please keep in mind that: It is a blatant violation of basic proven well
established scientific rules (i.e. principles and processes) to rely on unproven and
undocumented beliefs (e.g. by concluding that the belief is self-evident fact). In
real science, there are no self-evident facts. Nothing can be a fact, until the fact is
proven by using documented proof supported by irrefutable evidence. The
falsifiable proof must be documented, so that it could be falsified by anyone (any
time in the future, if there is a flaw), if and when it is possible, for example, by
finding new contradictory evidence or anomalies. Any such fact can no longer be
a fact, as soon as its proof is falsified.
The scientific processes and principles formulated in the 17th century have
been continuously validated, improved and perfected ever since. Today scientific
processes and principles are widely used, highly mature, rigorously validated and
proven methods or tools for acquiring knowledge in the scientific domains. The
researchers of software and computer science committed such an error over 45
years ago by relying on untested and undocumented beliefs for evolving software
engineering paradigm. Since the scientific revolution in the 17th century no other
scientific or engineering discipline committed such cardinal sin (i.e. error).
The geocentric paradox is rooted in “axiom or first principle” that the Earth
is static. Existing paradigm for CBD is rooted in “axioms or opinions”, such as, it is
impossible to invent real-software-components (that are equivalent to the physical
components) for eliminating spaghetti code by achieving real CBSD (that is
equivalent to the CBD of physical products). Either such axioms (or opinions) can
be either a facts or an assumption. As per the scientific process, no axiom (or
opinion) can be a fact (i) if it is not supported by falsifiable proof backed by
evidence or (ii) the proof can be falsified. As per the scientific processes, if it is not
a fact it must be treated and clearly documented as an assumption. What else it
can be? Relying on unproven belief by insisting that it is “self-evident fact” results
in a crisis.
Software researchers committed/repeated the biggest mistake
An Illustration of Causes and Symptoms of a Resulting Crisis
If you investigate history for finding the biggest mistake ever committed by
main stream philosophers or scientists, this mistake would be on the top of the list:
Relying on undocumented and unproven belief, by insisting that the belief is self-
evident fact Eternal Truth, which can never be proven wrong.
Mankind committed this kind of mistake over 2000 years ago by believing
that “the Earth is static” is a self-evident fact (or eternal truth). For example, many
philosophers insisted that the so called self-evident-fact (i.e. “truth for eternity”)
needs neither proof nor documenting it as an assumption. It is not an eternal truth.
It is not even truth (or fact). It was just a flawed axiomatic belief - best possible
educated axiom, based on the best available knowledge, wisdom and expertise
2000 years ago. Mankind’s scientific knowledge and perception of reality evolved
by relying on this so called self-evident fact for over 1600 years, which resulted in
complex geocentric paradox. Please notice that the error is in the very seed, from
which geocentric paradox evolved. This error led to greatest scientific crisis in the
history. Exposing the error resulted in greatest scientific revolution.
The software researchers committed exactly this kind of mistakes 48 years
ago, by relying on untested beliefs such as it is impossible to invent real-software-
components (that are equivalent to the physical components) for achieving real
CBSD (that is equivalent to the CBD of physical products). Unfortunately, today,
most researchers insist that such so called self-evident fact needs neither proof
nor documenting that it as an unsubstantiated belief. Many researchers today feel
that it is heresy to ask for proof. Can such beliefs be treated as “eternal facts?
Those so called self-evident facts were just an axiomatic beliefs based on
best available knowledge and state of software technology (e.g. early primitive
programming languages) nearly 50 years ago. They are certainly not proven facts.
Nothing can be a fact, until it is proven as stipulated by well-established and proven
scientific rules. It is impossible to find, if anyone ever even tried to find proof. No
one else ever even questioned the validity of the 50 years old beliefs, which are
very foundation (e.g. as seeds) to CBSD/CBSE (Component Based Design or
Engineering for Software) in particular and software engineering in general.
Since the beliefs were not documented as assumptions, researchers were
not informed that they are beliefs. Subsequent advancements in technology and
programming languages could have falsified the beliefs decades ago, if those
beliefs were kept on the radars of young researchers by documenting them as
assumptions. So no one even tried to validate the hidden beliefs. The passionate
efforts of tens of thousands of researchers for many decades (i.e. decade after
decade since late 1960s) created large body of knowledge (having many thick
layers). Those beliefs were buried so deeply under layers upon layers of body of
knowledge (created for decades) comprising hundreds of thousands of research
papers, concepts and experiences (of retrograde motions and epicycles), which
also has been subtly shaping and slowly but profoundly altering the perception of
reality of researchers and experts. Questioning the validity of seed beliefs at the
root is questioning the validity of whole paradigm - a huge body of knowledge
rooted in the beliefs and evolved by relying on the so called “self-evident facts”.
Each of such axiomatic beliefs at the root/core slowly transforms into (i.e.
perceived as) “eternal truth”, when buried deep under huge pressure of growing
body of knowledge that subtly but profoundly alters and shapes the perception of
reality for prolonged period, as carbon slowly grows into diamonds under huge
pressure deep under thick geological layers of the Earth over long periods. For
example, 500 years ago it was impossible to find even single observation of
concept in the huge body of knowledge for supporting the heliocentric model. That
is, almost every concept, fact or observation contradicted heliocentric model and
philosophers used them to invalidate it, when heliocentric model was proposed.
Likewise, body of knowledge for existing CBSE is in clear contradiction to
the reality we know about the physical components and the CBD of physical
products. Today no one else even knows true nature and essence of the CBD.
How could anyone possibly go against such as huge body of knowledge and
profoundly altered perception of reality to expose flawed “truths for eternity”, if the
researchers don’t even know the biggest mistake and/or refuse to know and learn
from the biggest mistake in the history of science? It is a monumental mistake to
rely on unproven belief by insisting that it is a self-evident fact. Period/full-stop.
There are no ifs, no and, or buts. No excuses. No exceptions. He is a fake or
incompetent researcher, if he insists that it is not a huge mistake.
About 400 years ago, the BoK (Body of Knowledge for geocentric paradox
filled with countless inexplicable anomalies and contradictions (i.e. a scientific
crisis), where the anomalies and contradictions were justified by using more and
more beliefs and baseless excuse such as it is the very nature of the universe.
Existing paradigm for CBSD (Component Based Design for Software products) is
exhibiting remarkably similar symptoms. Today software engineering is in crisis,
because its huge BoK is filled with inexplicable retrograde motions and
contradictions, which were justified by using more and more unsubstantiated
beliefs and baseless excuse such as software is unique or different.
Except the researches of software, after exhaustive search, I could find no
evidence that any other scientific or engineering discipline committed this kind of
mistake. Existing software engineering paradox has been evolving by relying on
such flawed beliefs for 45 years. This resulted in software crisis and spaghetti
code. Exposing this error certainly leads to software engineering revolution.
The modern scientific methods had roots in the 17th century scientific
revolution. The founding fathers of modern science formulated and formalized
scientific rules (i.e. processes & principles) in the 17th century during the scientific
revolution, particularly to avoid repeating this kind of mistake (because they had
experienced first-hand the pain and suffering for exposing the error). Almost no
researcher today could empathies with the pain they had endured: http://real-
software-components.com/forum_blogs/BriefSummaryOfTruths.html#Chronology
Many philosophers (e.g. Galileo & Bruno) were threatened or persecuted
and severely punished for trying hard and passionately to expose the error at the
root of geocentric paradox. Bruno was executed and Galileo was forced to recant
under the threat of execution. It looks like, nearly after 400 years, I am the first
person to endure similar (but far less degree) pain and humiliations (e.g. insults,
snubs or personal attacks) for working hard (with passion) to expose similar kind
of error. I am determined to expose this error at any cost and I will never give up.
If a scientific or engineering discipline has so called “self-evident fact” at its
core, a complex paradox (e.g. altered perception of reality) grows over time as
more and more researchers try to advance the discipline. Geocentric paradox
evolved for 1600 years, due to the efforts of thousands of researchers for many
generations. Many times more productive effort must have wasted on existing
software engineering paradox than the geocentric paradox. Existing paradox for
software engineering has been evolving for 45 years due to the hard work and
well-coordinated efforts of global network of tens of thousands of well trained, far
more informed and enlightened 20th century researchers at any time, by relying on
ever growing BoK, which is rooted in so called self-evident facts (that are in danger
of becoming eternal truth, under prolonged period and growing weight of the BoK).
Abstract: The Body of Knowledge (or “BoK”) for any scientific or engineering
discipline is as good as our understanding and validity of the facts at the core (or
the very foundation) of the BoK. Having flawed facts (i.e. flawed beliefs considered
to be self-evident facts) corrupts the BoK (e.g. concepts, observations and derived
facts) created by relying on the flawed facts. Anything can be a fact, if and only if,
it is proven by using demonstrable, repeatable and falsifiable proof backed by
sound evidence and it is impossible to falsify the proof and evidence. Nothing else
must be treated or considered as fact, for example to rely on it to expand the BoK.
Everything else must be treated and clearly documented as an assumption, that
must be validated (if and when it is possible to validate). Having flawed fact (i.e.
the Earth is static) at the core of the basic sciences resulted in geocentric paradox
and scientific crisis. Having flawed facts in the foundation of computer science
resulted in the existing software crisis. Isn’t it common sense: Relying on flawed
facts (or wrong assumptions) diverts any research effort or even investigation into
a wrong path. This kind of mistakes diverted the research effort and hard work of
hundreds of thousands of software researchers into a wrong path and the effort
resulted in huge chunks of corrupted BoK created by perusing fool’s errand in the
wrong path. Such biggest mistakes must be avoided at any cost and if such
mistake already committed, it must be detected quickly.

Supplementary resource (1)

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.