|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
> Personally, I would make the separation that "Euclidean geometry" is a
> mathematical theory, while "the real world conforms to Euclidean
> geometry" is a scientific theory.
Exactly this. There are all kinds of geometries that are *not* useful
outside mathematics, *because* they don't conform closely enough to the real
world.
Which is more scientific: Newton's equations, or Einstein's equations?
It's just that mathematical theories that can't be related to something
useful predicting how the world works get talked about only in very abstruse
and rare situations. Hence, all the "math" that most people know is math
that's somehow equatable to some subset of reality, making it seem like math
is about reality.
Generate random text strings until one compiles. What good is that program?
It almost certainly doesn't do anything useful. But it's just as valid a
program as one you've carefully crafted from a detailed specification.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |