Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
physics through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing
physics through a physics lens?
Somewhat off topic, but what do you think of
Structure and Interpretaion of Classical Mechanics
Gerald Jay Sussman and Jack Wisdom
2001, MIT Press
ISBN 0-262-019455-4
?
This book does not involve using `a computer science lens', but as it
says in the Preface
Classical mechanics is deceptively simple. .... Traditional
mathematical notation contributes to this problem. Symbols have
ambiguous meanings, ....
[in this book] Computational algorithms are used to communicate
precisely some of the methods used in the analysis of dynamical
phenomena. Expressing the methods of variational mechanics in a
computer language forces them to be unambiguous and
computationally effective.
To bring the question back to topic, would it be useful to consider
thinking about a photon's actions through a computer science lens as a
*metaphor*? (In this case, the action is specified by a `method'
appropriate to the context, where the actions are either going through
two slits at the same time, like a wave upon the water, or else
behaving like a stone.)
Then, could the metaphor eventually be tranformed into physics? If
so, how?
--
Robert J. Chassell Rattlesnake Enterprises
http://www.rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.teak.cc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
