Re: Physics is about mathematical models

From: AllYou! (idaman_at_conversent.net)
Date: 01/11/05 

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:38:19 -0500

<reany@asu.edu> wrote in message
news:1105454800.935604.177560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> AllYou! wrote:
> > "nightbat" <nightbat@home.ffni.com> wrote in message
> [snip]
> > > > observe is too wide open. Physics should be about understanding
> the physical and not
> > just
> > > > the hobby of building models.
>
> There is nothing hobbish about building mathematical models that work.

There is no way to know what it means *to work* unless there is acceptance of the
objectivity and inevitability of patterns to all that stimulates our senses. You haven't
accepted that and so you cannot use that term in any meaningful way.

> The standard normative metaphysical BS about physics presented above.
> Physics is about what it can prove it can accomplish. The best that
> physics can prove it can accomplish is to build mathematical models
> that work -- and that is a hell of a lot, which too many people wrongly
> depreciate. They demand more -- the unattainable -- they demand no less
> than the truth of what they think is physicality.
>
> AllYou certainly does! He claims to be able to make an absolute
> distinction between what is and what is not physical on the set of
> human concepts.

That's simply a lie and you either know that, or you simply lack the intellect to
understand what is plainly communicated to you. I claim that within the presumptions
which we make when we endeavor to study matter and energy, we can distinguish what is and
what is not physical. I've explained this to you a multitude of times. You're obviously
not up to the task of understanding that.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Predictions from Mathematical models
    ... track of the "To what do the laws of physics apply?" ... except mathematical models must be based on observations ... mathematical formalism that fits the observations, ... > particles, and there is no temperature for an individual particle. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Different application of mathematical models
    ... > Physical theories are expressed as mathematical models. ... Much like C++, modern physics suffers ... > correlate to what is observed in nature. ... > axiomatically, include the observer explicitly. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: rotating magnetic field
    ... Has anyone said that abstract mathematical models are not useful? ... Do EM waves actually exist? ... Establishment physics (and as Pete would say, ... exist because of some "probability fields"? ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)
  • Re: Math & physics.
    ... created suggesting math is an infinite number of logical systems each ... with the application to physics ... it's in reasonable agreement with known measurement. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Physics is about mathematical models
    ... > There is nothing hobbish about building mathematical models that work. ... > Physics is about what it can prove it can accomplish. ... > AllYou certainly does! ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)