You have not posed any objections to the thought experiment; you have only posed objections to your idea of a possible practical experiment.
Your thought experiment gets emptier and emptier. I have thought about possible objections to your thoughts.
You would be responsible for designing the experiment so that such factors as bias in the initial release are eliminated. If that creeps in as a bias, then you have failed to design the experiment properly. That's not a flaw in the principle. Teacher: "Designing a vapour chamber will show you subatomic particles." Student: "But how will you get a pure gas in the chamber without it leaking? ? If you can't do that. your theory of subatomic particles is just fantasy."
This is vacuous. I have listed the principles, you have not provided any refutation of the principles, you've only provided ideas of flawed experimental designs. (And I agree! Reject those designs that don't test the principle of interest.)
I've already suggested an experiment that would potentially falsify your "principle" - and I have predicted the result.
It won't. If your experiment doesn't account for the meandering path of the cards possibly affecting the outcome , then it's a bad experiment. Design it properly.
Huh? That's what I'm telling you, that the meandering path of the cards is likely to be a more significant factor than the weight.
Except that the meandering is random, which means a larger enough sample size will eliminate it. Or, a smaller sample size, but a lower (though still not zero) probability of being sorted at the end.
Is it? Or is it aerodynamically related to the weight? (A heavier card would dive faster and thus climb faster.) Is it possible that there is an inverse relationship?
Yep, we would have to define it as such. (But, I think that would be the most logical starting point, just sayin') Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I have asserted it and then I have defended it. There is no "declaration of true" in discussions. It stands unless defeated. You haven't defeated the assertions; you've created an experiment of your own design, and then attacked the flaws in that. A straw man.