The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP)
- PDF / 224,134 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 610.016 x 792 pts Page_size
- 17 Downloads / 126 Views
BioMed Central
Open Access
The Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) & Principle (UPP) David L Abel Address: Department of ProtoBioCybernetics/ProtoBioSemiotics, The Gene Emergence Project of The Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc, 113-120 Hedgewood Dr Greenbelt, MD 20770-1610, USA E-mail: [email protected]
Published: 3 December 2009 Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling 2009, 6:27
Received: 29 September 2009 doi: 10.1186/1742-4682-6-27 Accepted: 3 December 2009
This article is available from: http://www.tbiomed.com/content/6/1/27 © 2009 Abel; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract Background: Mere possibility is not an adequate basis for asserting scientific plausibility. A precisely defined universal bound is needed beyond which the assertion of plausibility, particularly in life-origin models, can be considered operationally falsified. But can something so seemingly relative and subjective as plausibility ever be quantified? Amazingly, the answer is, “Yes.” A method of objectively measuring the plausibility of any chance hypothesis (The Universal Plausibility Metric [UPM]) is presented. A numerical inequality is also provided whereby any chance hypothesis can be definitively falsified when its UPM metric of ξ is < 1 (The Universal Plausibility Principle [UPP]). Both UPM and UPP pre-exist and are independent of any experimental design and data set. Conclusion: No low-probability hypothetical plausibility assertion should survive peer-review without subjection to the UPP inequality standard of formal falsification (ξ < 1).
The seemingly subjective liquidity of “plausibility” Are there any objective standards that could be applied to evaluate the seemingly subjective notion of plausibility? Can something so psychologically relative as plausibility ever be quantified? Our skepticism about defining a precise, objective Universal Plausibility Metric (UPM) stems from a healthy realization of our finiteness [1], subjectivity [2], presuppositional biases [3,4], and epistemological problem [5]. We are rightly wary of absolutism. The very nature of probability theory emphasizes gray-scales more than the black and white extremes of p = 0 or 1.0. Our problem is that extremely low probabilities can only asymptotically approach impossibility. An extremely unlikely event’s probability always remains at least slightly > 0. No matter how many orders of magnitude is the negative exponent
of an event’s probability, that event or scenario technically cannot be considered impossible. Not even a Universal Probability Bound [6-8] seems to establish absolute theoretical impossibility. The fanatical pursuit of absoluteness by finite subjective knowers is considered counterproductive in post modern science. Open-mindedness to all possibilities is encouraged [9]. B
Data Loading...
