Re: Defining physics

From: Androcles (androc1es_at_nospamblueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 07/30/04 

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:36:20 GMT

"Daniel Weston" <daniel009@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:26844-4109C341-438@storefull-3134.bay.webtv.net...
| Patrick, in your introductory post you referred to the verb "prove".
| Please tell us what you mean by "prove". If you are talking about
| _absolute_ proof, you are wasting our time.

Where mathematics is concerned, proof absolute is certainly a requirement.
Androcles

 If you are talking about
| reasonable proof, there is nothing to talk about. Physics overflows
| with reasonable proofs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|