Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- From: "T.H. Ray" <thray123@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2007 09:11:14 EDT
Michael Press wrote:
In article<23698964.1188588087624.JavaMail.jakarta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
f
orum.org>,debatable.
"T.H. Ray" <thray123@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 31, 2:56 am, "T.H. Ray" <thray...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
That mathematics is a liberal art is not
facts.
And yet here we are debating it! Go figure.
You may think you're debating. I am only reciting
vs.After all, to some, even the claim of creationism
evolution is a "debate."
My first rule of debate is when there are two
well defined positions, they are both wrong.
Or both are half wrong. Or both are half right.
Depends upon whether you
are an optimist or a pessimist .. I am not a
creationist. Yet I believe
that standard evolution theory is wrong. (Some people
I know are experts
in the anatomy of the human body, that may be one
reason)
Han de Bruijn
One has to be careful of what one is talking about
here. Evolution is a fact in evidence, observable
and observed. The explanation for evolution is Darwin's
theory of common ancestry. Darwin's theory has been
much researched and refined in the last 150 years. One
of the more striking models of evolution in recent
history is the Gould-Eldredge model of Punctuated
Equilibrium. This is yet one more case where a
mathematically complete theory adds to our knowledge in
large leaps (pun intended).
Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- References:
- Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- Prev by Date: a cubiv question
- Next by Date: Many Solutions Manuals and Ebooks in Electronic (PDF)Format!
- Previous by thread: Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- Next by thread: Re: Mathematics: art or science?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading