Invisible wrote:
> "Real-world problems are simply degenerate cases of pure mathematical 
> problems."

	I recently attended a talk given by Arthur Jaffe, a (co)founder of the 
Clay institute and professor at Harvard (forgot if he's in the math or 
physics dept). His work is mathematical physics.

	I don't know his stance, but he knows many top physicists and perhaps 
mathematicians as well who'd disagree. Essentially, the (very boring) 
talk was about this very issue: Are mathematics and physics consistent 
with each other?

	A lot of the calculations in physics as currently performed are 
actually mathematically invalid. He gave this startling example. You see 
the g_s in the equation on this page?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment#Magnetic_moment_of_electrons

	It has now been measured to around 12 significant figures - perhaps the 
most precise measurement ever made. Those 12 figures agree with theory.

	And that theory is simply mathematically invalid (at least with the 
current state of mathematics).

	You just have to "think" differently to do serious theoretical physics. 
 From what little I've studied, I seriously think mathematics is a bit 
easier. At least in math, you're bound by certain rules - everything has 
to be logical and provable. In physics, I see them do wild things (i.e. 
mathematically questionable) fairly frequently and get good results. I 
just can't think that "freely" and ignore the fact that my infinities 
can be neglected, or something.

-- 
Why is the person who invests all your money called a broker?


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl

Post a reply to this message