Re: Mathematics and science

Robert Grumbine <bobg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If gravitation is proportional to the product of the masses and
inversely proportional to the distance between them, it still provides
no explanation.

If gravitation is due to the warping of spacetime by mass-energy, it
still provides no explanation.

Seriously -- both Newton's gravity and Einstein's gravity do not
explain _why_ there is gravity, any more than Eratosthenes explained
_why_ the earth should be a spheroid. In all cases, they explain
observations.

Yup.

My favorite is to ask a class why one can see through glass.
They tell me we can see through it because it is transparent.
I then tell them to go home and look up the word "transparent".

More to a point -- dismissing classical efforts as being descriptive
is precisely the wrong thing to do. It is to the extent that they
were being descriptive of observations that they _do_ approach modern
notions on the study of nature. Where classical authors were
departing most was on substituting conclusions derived from reason
(whether mathematical or otherwise) for conclusions based on observations.

Biology was classical up until the discovery of the role of DNA.

Surely there is something different in some people saying we have a
theory on mechanics, we also have a theory on gravity, now if we take
these two theories in a mathematical equation we can show this ..... and
if we show this it proves this......Then when we do get a result we submit
it to a peer review system based on experimental proof.

This to me shows quite a fundamental different view of the world to
anything the Greeks had and if it is not Greek then where did it come
from?


So I've always shuddered a bit when folks talk about medieval
science or classical science. I'd call the speculation
"natural philosophy" (Aristotle, et al.) or "practical
engineering".

Sure.

The term 'scientist' itself is a 19th century invention.
That alone should give us some caution about using related
terms for any period before then.

Of course I'll also snark at those who use 'engineer' or
'engineering' dismissively. My undergraduate degree was
engineering. Graduate was science. One grandfather was
a chemist, the other was a mechanical engineer.

That classical and medieval engineers achieved what they
did without modern scientific method is a tribute to their
creativity and understanding of nature.

I'll say. If one looks closely at the rate of innovation,
it looks to have really taken off in Europe during the Middle
Ages. On a per capita basis, they did very well indeed.


If they didn't pursue it
and publish it in ways that we might today, well, that makes
for a field of study in its own right.

That has been studied, though not with the intensity it really
should be. One did not "publish" because the concept had not
yet been invented. Some developments remained within families,
others within guilds or communities, and some became quite
widespread.

By the time most medieval inventions or developments are mentioned
in documents (or shown in illustrations) they had been around for
a while. This is one reason why there are few "transitional
species" available for examination. The less successful ones
never gained much attention.

--
--- Paul J. Gans
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Do you think?
    ... Saying anything else is saying the thousands of ancient texts ... ditch the natural explanation in favour of the supernateral ... you cannot apply physical science to something that is not ... Gravity is not physical. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Mathematics and science
    ... Prior to that one had plenty of practical engineering. ... It was only after science became established that scientific ... But modern science is different to anything the Greeks came up with. ... Seriously -- both Newton's gravity and Einstein's gravity do not ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Mathematics and science
    ... Prior to that one had plenty of practical engineering. ... It was only after science became established that scientific ... But modern science is different to anything the Greeks came up with. ... Seriously -- both Newton's gravity and Einstein's gravity do not ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Is the theory of gravity just an explanation of observations or a law of nature?
    ... In science, a theory is an explanation. ... with the theory of gravity, which is that the mass of what whatever it ... independent of composition and structure. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Abiogenesis
    ... Science cannot explain how it occurred. ... So the fact that there currently isn't an explanation now ... The greatest scientific minds in the world can't explain how to ... gravity fits into a single unified theory. ...
    (talk.origins)