"I have—"
"Wait," interrupted Murdoch again. "Please do not define X in terms of X. It isn't done except in very cheap dictionaries. You see, Mr. Barden, you are very earnest in your belief—for which we commend you. However self-determination is not enough to produce a science. Give us a shred of proof."
"Have you reviewed my mathematics?" demanded Barden.
"Naturally. And we find your mathematics unimpeachable. But an equation is not a flat statement of fact in spite of what they tell you. It is not even an instrument until you deduce from the equation certain postulates."
"But—
"I'll give an example. The simplest form of electronic equation is Ohm's Law. Resistance equals Voltage divided by Current. Or, simpler: E equals IR. That has been proven time and again by experiment. Your equations are logical. Yet some of your terms are as though we were working with Ohm's Law without ever having heard of resistance as a physical fact in the conduction of electricity. Your whole network of equations is sensible, but unless you define the terms in the present-day terminology, we can only state that your manipulation of your mathematics is simple symbolic logic. You state that if P implies notQ, such is so—and then neglect to state what notQ is, and go on to state what you can do with P. Unless we know your terms, we can't even state whether you are dividing by real or unreal factors."
"I see that you are unimpressed."
"Not at all. We hoped that you might have had some experimental evidence. Lacking anything material to support your theory—" Hansen spread out his hands in a gesture of frustration.
"Then I've been wasting my time—and yours?"
"Not entirely. Will you speak on your paper as an experiment in sheer semantics?"