On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 7:57:33 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > Alan Grayson aka Mr.Carl Sagan co-author wrote: > > *> you seem to deliberately ignore the fact that in physics we use >> idealized cases to reach important insights.* > > > Far from ignoring it for years I've been trying to convince Bruno that > mathematical approximations help us understand physical phenomena but > simulations are always simpler than the real physical thing; therefore > physics is not an approximation of mathematics but mathematics is an > approximation of physics. So physics is more fundamental than mathematics. > I mean... if a mathematical model of what the path of a hurricane will do > does not conform to what it actually does we don't say the physical > hurricane made an error, we say the computer model made an error. > > John K Clark >
The bottom line is this; firstly, that physics DOES have POSTULATES or PRINCIPLES as starting points for its theories; and secondly, that mathematics is generally used to see the consequences of these postulates or principles. What you claim is simply false, other than the obvious; that our models are imperfect. AG -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/37d75227-8fda-44fe-93ea-8db8c8adb2beo%40googlegroups.com.
