Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Postulates of General Relativity



John D. stated in part:

I agree they are synonymous, although I consider them equally
non-archaic. I detect no difference in the way mathemeticians
and physicists use the words. Axiom has the advantage of having
a nice adjective, axiomatic.

I'd venture to say that there is a subtle difference between a
mathematician's postulatess(axioms) and a physicist's.

The mathematicians make them a starting point for a system of "logic" and
the chosen axioms are essentially unassailable.

The physicist axioms on the other hand are assailable on the basis that they
may lead to a system of "logic" (theory) that doesn't match reality. I
suppose what I'm saying is that for the physicist the postulates should have
some bearing on the natural world, but for the mathematician there is no
such constraint.

Joel Rauber

This posting may or may not be the position of the writer; in
contradistinction to the statement below.

This posting is the position of the writer, not that of SUNY-BSC, NAU or the AAPT.