Re: Verification vs. Validation - Theoretical vs. Real Time Use

I throw that back to verification because it's theoretical. Verification is theoretical. Validation is real (or simulated such as, at minimum, accelerated life studies) use.
OK, lets look at the definitions of Verification and Validation from ISO 9000:2005. After all that's the basis for definitions for ISO 9001:2000 isn't it?
First some other definitions (from ISO 9000:2005), as they are referenced in the definitions for Verification and Validation.
Objective evidence -- data supporting the existance or verity of something.
NOTE Objective evidence can be obtained through observation, measurement, test, or other means.
Requirement -- need or expectation that is stated, generally implied or obligatory.
NOTE 3 A specified requirement is one that is stated, for example in a document.
Verificaion -- confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence that specified requirements have been fulfilled.
NOTE 2 Confirmation can comprise of activities such as
-- performing alternative calculations
-- comparing new design specification with a similar proven design specification
-- undertaking tests and demonstrations
-- reviewing documents prior to issue
Validation -- confirmation, through the provision of objective evidence that the requirements for a
specific intended use or application have been fulfilled.
NOTE 2 The use conditions for validation can be real or simulated
By these definitions Verificaiton doesn't need to be theoritical.
By these definitions Validations doesn't need to be real.
If anything, Validation can be more theoretical than Verification, at least from how I read it.
What Validation must do though is show
suitability for a specific intended use or application.
It looks like there is provision for wide interpretation on how to determine suitability for intended use.