"physicsboy" <leocurbelojr@gmail.com> writes:

I appreciate all your posts very much. Even though I may have
differences of opinion with some of you I cannot deny that there
is truth to your assertions. Do you guys think that every theory
that attempts to explain any physical phenomena (GR, Quantum, etc)
must be described mathematically? Meaning that it would have to be
expressed in mathematical terms. Or would some theories need to be
presented as ideas only where no mathematical meaning has been
determined?

If we're already at this, how about eliminating the use of language
to present ideas. Obviously, ideas should stand on their own, not
require a man-made language to convey them, right?:-) So lets limit
ourselves to ideas which can be conveyed by grunts and gestures
alone.
But wait, that too is a language, albeit limited. So it doesn't
seem we can give up on language.

Now, we've a field of human activity where ideas are generated and
conveyed using spoken and written non-mathematical language, namely
philosphy. And, while I wouldn't call it useless, yet it is
difficult to discern some progress in this field. Why? Because
there is good way to separate the working ideas from the
non-working ones. In fact there is even no good way to define
what the terms 'working" and "non-working" mean, with respect to
ideas. So, we're limited to popularity contests. That doesn't get
you far.

The reason we can make some progress in science is that we do have
a way of defining working and non-working ideas and separating the
working ones from the rest. This is done by comparison with
measurements. But in order to do so we need to formulate our ideas
in a language which allows for the generation of precise predictions
and for the comparison of said predictions with the results of the
measurements. And this language is math. What else would you use?

<> >><> >><> >><> >><>

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same".