Re: Orthography supporting sound changes?

On 12 Jan 2006 02:25:27 -0800, Seán O'Leathlóbhair
<jwlawler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<news:1137061526.982634.167620@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in sci.lang:

> Colin Fine wrote:
>> Seán O'Leathlóbhair wrote:

[...]

>>> Depends on the science. Mathematicians frequently study
>>> why things don't happen. A famous example being
>>> Fermat's Last Theorem. A huge amount of effort has
>>> been expended over the years to prove that something
>>> does not happen. Squaring the circle and trisecting
>>> angles are other examples of a lot of effort spent on
>>> proving something impossible.

>> Umm. Maths is not a science (in any sense relevant to
>> this discussion). A mathematician's "does not occur" is
>> qualitatively different from a scientist's "does not
>> occur".

> Whether maths is a science is a tricky question.

Not at all: Colin is absolutely right.

> Universities cannot seem to agree on whether to give BAs
> and MAs or BScs and MScs, some even let you choose.

How universities choose to classify the subject is
irrelevant to the discussion. (Indeed, it's largely an
administrative decision.)

[...]

> Also, it is hard to draw a clear line between maths and
> physics.

Actually, it isn't. The separation is very clear, despite
the fact that much mathematics was inspired by physical
questions and, conversely, much mathematics is used in
physics. The existence of non-Euclidean geometries, for
instance, is a purely mathematical result; that some of them
are useful in describing the spacetime in which we exist is
a matter for physicists.

> Physics is surely the archetypal science. How about
> statements such as "You cannot travel faster than light"?

> OK, a physicist's "cannot happen" is a bit weaker than a
> mathematician's but it is still a strong statement.

It isn't the same kind of statement at all. The
mathematician's 'cannot happen' refers to a logical
impossibility within a well-defined abstract system. The
physicist's 'cannot happen' by no means has the force of a
logical impossibility.

[...]

Brian
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Principle of Equivalence Explained
    ... issue about science. ... principles of physics, such as leverage. ... the SUBTRACTIVE case in which the light velocity is being retarded by ... understanding of mathematics. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Lightspeed exceeded
    ... all sets of axioms are treated more or less on an equal ... If you throw them all away it is no longer a science. ... I am referring to the rules which physics sets itself. ... If I am on a battlefield the mathematics will show that if a gun is pointed in a certain direction with a certain elevation a shell will come close enough to me to kill me. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hooking processors together
    ... Will having a friend ... on science funding and their influence on other fields of science useful ... The approach of this book emphasizes physics, ... with mathematics. ...
    (comp.arch)
  • Barrow not that stupid (was Re: Henin: her all-time rank)
    ... I've examined Barrow's paper ("Gödel and Physics") in which the ... sciences), not science in general. ... Science is based on mathematics; mathematics cannot discover ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)
  • Re: Barrow not that stupid (was Re: Henin: her all-time rank)
    ... Joe Ramirez wrote: ... sciences), not science in general. ... he is using it as a synonym for "physics." ... Science is based on mathematics; ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)