The final sentence of the neutrino paper that everybody is buzzing about:
We deliberately do not attempt any theoretical or phenomenological interpretation of
From a somewhat older work in physics:
Rationem vero harum gravitatis proprietatum ex phænomenis nondum potui deducere, et hypotheses non fingo. Quicquid enim ex phænomenis non deducitur, hypothesis vocanda est; et hypotheses seu metaphysicae, seu physicae, seu qualitatum occultarum, seu mechanicae, in philosophia experimentali locum non habent. In hac philosophia Propositiones deducuntur ex phaenomenis, et redduntur generales per inductionem.
I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not frame hypotheses. For whatever is not deduced from the phenomena must be called a hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult qualities, or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. In this philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered general by induction.
(via Wikipedia, so salt as needed.)
I’m not trying to claim that this work is on the level of the Principia, or anything. Or even to make a detailed analogy between the paper and the General Scholium (which is mostly Isaac Newton being kind of pissy, in Latin). But I recently re-read the chapter of the book-in-production that mentions the Newton quote, so the phrases struck me as amusingly similar.