Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Am Very Sorry Aurino!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on July 19, 2002 13:38:35 UTC

Aurino,

You disappoint me severely!

****
Aurino: Nothing bores me more than a long, abstract mathematical dissertation (sorry Dick).
****

My response to Yanniru's earlier comments was only long because he presented so many misrepresentations of what I said. My responses to each of his comments are actually quite short and I would have expected you at least to recognize Yanniru's confusion between indices on an array and the values of the elements in the array. Only a complete ignoramus can manage to confuse that issue.

In essence, Yanniru has called you all idiots by holding forth that authority is superior to understanding and that you should bow to his credentials. The fact that he did so overtly shows overwhelming confidence that no one on this forum will be able to see through his farce. Perhaps he is right.

Regarding:

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/god/messages/19915.shtml

****
Aurino: That was a real gem of a post! Can you do better?
****

I have read some of the responses and have this comment to make: many of the responses confuse physics and mathematics. Yanniru's comment that "MOST math relationships cannot be verified experimentally" succinctly points out his failure to understand the relationship between math and physics. Math applies to physics only to the extent that real relationships can be mapped into the abstract relationships conceived of in mathematics. Once any mapping is discovered, than that relationship can be mapped into something real and is then subject to experimental verification.

It follows that only those aspects of mathematics which cannot be mapped into reality cannot be verified experimentally.

The other issues brought up by a number of you revolve around the issue of infinity. Now anyone who has been around here long enough to have read any of Paul's comments on that issue (and to my knowledge, Paul is the only person on this forum with an advanced degree in mathematics) should be aware of his complaint of the unreality of infinity.

So my complaint about Yanniru's assertion is that it is equivalent to the assertion that most of physics is not dependent upon mathematics; a rather asinine comment.

And, Bruce, say something intelligent once; just for the fun of it!

Have fun -- Dick

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins