Physics is Numerology, but a very poor one?
- From: ivars.fabriciuss@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 15 Aug 2006 00:10:29 -0700
I have noticed many negative comments about numerology in groups,
especially in physics sections.
I just wonder:
When You say :
"we are looking for analytical solutions .." or
"we are looking for solutions in the form.."or
"we expand the function and DISMISS smaller terms to arrive to
analytical solution "
When I hear or read these sentences, I feel like: " We have arrived to
this point safely. NOW STOP THINKING."
Is not that a Numerology ? In fact we put constraints on reality which
comes from a limited subset of Mathematics. Why is it correct?
I think Nature is able to produce everything mathematicians can
imagine, and more. Limiting ourselves to any subset and trying to
find solutions which correspond to it and also explains experience is
exactly what numerology is about.
Looking at the ability of continuos math to explain reality I have come
to a conclusion it is a very poor subset. Number theory is definitely
better, even if used at the level of ancient mathematicians.
e.g. Diophantine never looked for general solution to his equations.
Not because he was an idiot, or did not have the tools, but because he
new that such theory does not exist in principle and looking for it
would mean losing time and it will not give all solutions which he
easily found every time starting from a scratch. A lot of information
he looked for would be lost.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Physics is Numerology, but a very poor one?
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: Physics is Numerology, but a very poor one?
- From: hanson
- Re: Physics is Numerology, but a very poor one?
- Prev by Date: Whosoever liveth and believeth in Jesus shall never die ?
- Next by Date: Re: question
- Previous by thread: Re: is non-living stuff turning into living stuff from scratch even...
- Next by thread: Re: Physics is Numerology, but a very poor one?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
