Re: Simple explanations. Was: what are the labs for?

["Donald E. Simanek" <dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu>]

On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Dewey Dykstra, Jr. wrote:

> What about good "explanations" which do not involve formal mathematics?
> What about mechanical models?  Sure lots of models can be described with
> formal mathematics, but can't models be thought of as physical or
> mechanical ones by someone without having to resort to formal mathematics?
....
> But, what about mechanical models?  Don't they "work".

I suppose it depends. Perhaps you can suggest some particular ones you
think work very well, and we can discuss them. Any model is an analogy,
and all anaolgies break down at some point. The beauty of mathematical
models is that when they break down, you can fix them, or invent new
mathematics for the purpose. 

The problem with mechanical models is that you first must understand
mechanics. The problem with visual models is that some things can't be
visualized. Too often we use them as crutches to avoid sweating the
details. At some point we must "throw away our crutches" to achieve fully
adequate and powerful descriptions of nature.

	-- Donald

......................................................................
Dr. Donald E. Simanek                            Office: 717-893-2079
Professor of Physics                                FAX: 717-893-2048
Lock Haven University, Lock Haven, PA. 17745
dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu                 http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek
......................................................................