Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Mooney
Maddog,
This may come as a wake-up call for you on all those extra dimensions in string/M-theory.
From near the end of the "The Ontology and Cosmology of Non-Euclidean Geometry"
essay we are discussing in the spacetime thread:
The Ontology and Cosmology of Non-Euclidean Geometry |
No I read that webpage already. However -- making a claim that [paraphrased] "mathematical theory" being "right" does not make it "correct". This does NOT in and of
itself
Negate said mathematical theory. See mathematics is a tool, it goes as far as it goes
in the description or representation of what a theory is attempting to describe. Corroborating
evidence is always helpful. A theory can stand on its own (for a time) if it is
1. Self-Consistent.
2. Congruent with the ongoing knowledge with which it is attributable to.
3. Can be tested with some authority (even if eventually).
Your reference of the webpage did not Negate the value of mathematics. Yet you seem
to imply this. It is as though we "should" stop attempting to bother calculating anything.
Michael doesn't understand it so it is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Mooney
It fits Modest's overblown estimate of 'the more math the better' (not a quote) as well.
|
I am a protaganist for "what works".
All the better.
If Mathematics works, I use it. If I ever [hasn't so far] found that Mathematics were
found to inadequate for the task, I would look for something else. Divinning rods, anyone ?
maddog
