Re: "Negotiating" a curve. EUREKA?

["Miguel A. Santos" <msantos@ETSE.URV.ES>]

On Sat, 6 Nov 1999, John Denker wrote:

> At 10:02 AM 11/6/99 -0500, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
> > To understand is to find a satisfactory causal relation.
>
> Strongly disagree in principle.  To understand is to find the correct
> relation.  Sometimes the correct relation is "causality".  Sometimes it
> isn't.  Please read what Feynman says about this in _The Character of
> Physical Law_.
Isn't there some ambiguity? What do you mean by 'correct'? Consider f.i.
scattering of two particles in newtonian mechanics  and its expression
in special relativity. The latter shows us that a 'more precise'
(satifactory) model should consider another parameter, namely the
universal constant 'c', the velocity of light in vacuum, which wasn't
there in Newton's epoch. Would you then mean that at that time there was
no understanding? Surely not.
 Probably you are talking about a precise distinction made by Feynmann in
his book. I shall try to find my copy of the book re-read it. Not sure now
where I put it.

 Regards,
        Miguel A. Santos
        msantos@etse.urv.es