Physics versus Mathematics
- From: "Nicolaas Vroom" <nicolaas.vroom@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:32:35 +0200
xxein:
I think mathematics is an abstract set and must be differentiated from
a physical set. After all, two H2's don't combine to make H4's.
Regardless of this example, do you really think that all mathematical
results would really produce a physical result?
Math is a descriptive tool to help quantify physical relations and
actions. Math cannot force the relation-action.
It might provide insight if it captures the essence of the physic, but
it cannot 'make' it.
You read many of these posts. What makes a math incorrect? Because
it doesn't apply to the physic you want it to? Why should any math be
a sole dictator of a physic? We hardly know the physic to start with.
The math 'applications' are fine when restricted to the bounds of the
physic. They are also fine when they are a pure math. Thus the
difference.
I fully agree with what you said.
Specific with the sentence:
Mathematics is a descriptive tool to help to quantify the
physical relations.
The question to ask what type of mathematics is
necessary to describe (understand as much as possible)
all of physics ?
Are complex numbers required ?
Can you do without them ?
Nicolaas Vroom
http://users.pandora.be/nicvroom/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- From: PD
- Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- From: Ken S. Tucker
- Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- References:
- W.W Sawyer passes away.......
- From: Ken S. Tucker
- Re: W.W Sawyer passes away.......
- From: xxein
- W.W Sawyer passes away.......
- Prev by Date: Re: Recommendations for effective online scientific discussion
- Next by Date: Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?
- Previous by thread: Re: W.W Sawyer passes away.......
- Next by thread: Re: Physics versus Mathematics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|