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

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Only Read The Intro You Posted..

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Bruce on July 14, 2003 20:57:18 UTC

" physics its not enough that mathematical structures are coherent or consistent, these must have a much more tangiblereference to reality."

Pretty much means that theoretical models for making predictions wrt natural phenomena must be internally consistent and empirically testable. He goes on to pretty much reitierate this point of fact. Unfortunately this isn't well understood outside the physics community. For instance when somebody claims Einstein was wrong for modeling time the way he did in his theory or he was wrong for using geometry to describe how things behave in a gravitational field. I only read
what you wrote [I assume it was from his intro].

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 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