- #1
stevenytc
- 12
- 0
Isn't the subject great? Anyone that shares my feeling please reply "I LOVE PHYSICS"
stevenytc said:Isn't the subject great? Anyone that shares my feeling please reply "I LOVE PHYSICS"
Char. Limit said:Math > Physics.
Pengwuino said:Don't be alarmed. He has mathematical dyslexia and meant Physics >> Dirt > Math.
stevenytc said:Isn't the subject great? Anyone that shares my feeling please reply "I LOVE PHYSICS"
elabed haidar said:you still can understand it because its logical ,
Pengwuino said:Don't be alarmed. He has mathematical dyslexia and meant Physics >> Dirt > Math.
Pengwuino said:Don't be alarmed. He has mathematical dyslexia and meant Physics >> Dirt > Math.
Mathematics is a tool created by physicists to solve physics problems. Then it turned out that you can apply it in other areas as well. It is our physical world which dictates how the maths looks, not the other way around. All axioms are chosen so that the mathematics resulting from it looks like something familiar to us, it is created to fit physics. Then some mathematicians extrapolated on some of those concepts but ultimately it all comes from physics. Physics on the other hand isn't created by anything, it is discovered.micromass said:Pfu, we all know that physics is just an application of mathematics.
Klockan3 said:Mathematics is a tool created by physicists to solve physics problems. Then it turned out that you can apply it in other areas as well. It is our physical world which dictates how the maths looks, not the other way around. All axioms are chosen so that the mathematics resulting from it looks like something familiar to us, it is created to fit physics. Then some mathematicians extrapolated on some of those concepts but ultimately it all comes from physics. Physics on the other hand isn't created by anything, it is discovered.
All of those philosophers were more physicists than they were mathematicians, Thales for example invented maths since he wanted to calculate different physical properties such as distances.micromass said:Mathematics has been around much longer than physics. It was Thales (about 2600 years ago) that formulated the first mathematical theorems.
Physics is much younger, so it isn't fair to say that mathematics is created by physicists. In my opinion, mathematics is created by economists and philosophers.
Klockan3 said:All of those philosophers were more physicists than they were mathematicians, Thales for example invented maths since he wanted to calculate different physical properties such as distances.
elabed haidar said:math is abstract , if it wasnt for physic's you couldn't understand the meaning fo the universe , all the inventions came to life by physics , maybe with some help of math but physics is the basic study for understanding everything is going on in life.
micromass said:I wouldn't exactly say that the Greek philosophers were physicists. Real physics using the scientific method began with Galileo. It was then that mathematics was used to describe various physical properties. But of course, mathematics was already sufficiently developed by then.
Thales, by the way, was the first to formulate and prove things like "the diameter of a circle cuts the circle in two equal parts". I doubt that he proved this to use it in physical things, no he proved it because of a certain philosophy.
elabed haidar said:do you want me to start with big bang? relativity or what ?? my point is that whether you like it or not, physics makes you understand how the world works ? from the simple things like why hot heat always goes to cold stuff not vice versa to special relativity of einstien?
Vagn said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Haytham" disagrees with this.
Why do you draw the line of physics at the period when the scientific method were born? Why wouldn't Thales who wanted to show that all phenomena have a natural explanation be deemed a physicist? Isn't that the core of a physicist, trying to explain the inner workings of the world in a way intuitive to people?micromass said:I wouldn't exactly say that the Greek philosophers were physicists. Real physics using the scientific method began with Galileo.
No, math was already used long before then to describe and calculate things like distances, volumes and velocities. He just formalized the process.micromass said:It was then that mathematics was used to describe various physical properties.
That doesn't go against anything I said. All the old philosophers were scholars of many subjects, I just stated that the philosophers at least according to my notions are more physicists than mathematicians.micromass said:Thales, by the way, was the first to formulate and prove things like "the diameter of a circle cuts the circle in two equal parts". I doubt that he proved this to use it in physical things, no he proved it because of a certain philosophy.
Klockan3 said:Why do you draw the line of physics at the period when the scientific method were born? Why wouldn't Thales who wanted to show that all phenomena have a natural explanation be deemed a physicist? Isn't that the core of a physicist, trying to explain the inner workings of the world in a way intuitive to people?
elabed haidar said:Guys listen , i admit math is important , but you guys(math ) only help out but can not explain anything in the reason why the universe goes always to disorder(second law ofthermodynamics) or why sometimes we can not hear the sound coming from a speaker (sound interference) everything you need to know goes back to physics
Can you find any definition out there which says that physicists needs to conform to the scientific method to be called physicists? Quote from wikipedia:micromass said:It doesn't mean that you want to explain the working of the world that you are a physicist. Then you could as well say that the writers of the Bible were physicists since they also wanted to describe the world.
What a physicist is to me, is somebody who describes the world using the scientific method. Somebody using experiments to falsify their hypotheses. This was (as far as I know of) not done by the Greeks. That's why they are philosophers and not physicists.
Making theories based on reasoning on how the world works is still physics even if you don't apply the scientific method. Things like black holes and most of quantum do not abide to the scientific method but are still considered physics and people working with them are still considered physicists. Quantum doesn't abide to the scientific method since by its very nature you can't have repeatable experiments for example, you wouldn't be able to falsify it since it is all about probabilities. Physicists however are pragmatic about this and understands that you don't have to be that strict with the scientific method, it was created on the basis that the world is deterministic.Physics is one of the oldest academic disciplines, perhaps the oldest through its inclusion of astronomy.//^ Evidence exists that the earliest civilizations dating back to beyond 3000 BCE, such as the Sumerians, Ancient Egyptians, and the Indus Valley Civilization, all had a predictive knowledge and a very basic understanding of the motions of the Sun, Moon, and stars.
Klockan3 said:Can you find any definition out there which says that physicists needs to conform to the scientific method to be called physicists? Quote from wikipedia:
So all who do things related to quantum are not doing physics but instead doing mathematics? Since strictly speaking quantum do not conform to the scientific method.micromass said:I can't, but that's my definition of physics. If you do math without scientific method, then you're just doing mathematics, not physics. You're free to disagree, though.
Klockan3 said:So all who do things related to quantum are not doing physics but instead doing mathematics? Since strictly speaking quantum do not conform to the scientific method.
No, you can't falsify any predictions made by quantum since no occurrence have 0 probability.micromass said:I don't know much about quantum, but quantum physicists do work with experiments to falsify their hypotheses. So yes, quantum is physics.
Klockan3 said:No, you can't falsify any predictions made by quantum since no occurrence have 0 probability.
elabed haidar said:can you see a plus or multiplication sign on the road,? can you tell me where can i buy a kilo of matrices? come on micromass , you can talk about the heat , electricity , gravity ... everything is realted to physics , formulas just makes thing clearer that's all
They aren't falsifying anything with it, what they are doing is to make the possibility that they are wrong acceptable, something like one in some billions or so. Physicists today are working under something quite similar to the scientific method but they aren't strictly working under it. Smaller experiments have way more lenient probability requirements.micromass said:Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics then. I can see a lot of falsifications of quantum physics there. Why did they build the LHC, you think?
I know, I have a masters in maths and you even learn that in the basic probability course. But in what way do that make my statement weaker?micromass said:And because something has 0 probability, doesn't mean that it's impossible! That's a much occurring mistake that people make!
Klockan3 said:They aren't falsifying anything with it, what they are doing is to make the possibility that they are wrong acceptable, something like one in some billions or so. Physicists today are working under something quite similar to the scientific method but they aren't strictly working under it. Smaller experiments have way more lenient probability requirements.