Re: Physics is a human construct

[LUDWIK KOWALSKI <KOWALSKIL@alpha.montclair.edu>]

                 Referring to :
> > I learned geometry 50 years ago and it is useful to me today, as it 
> > has been to many generations. I learned Pascal only 5 years ago and 
> > it is not useful; students are introduced to programming via C++ 
> > today. And it will be Java, or something else, tomorrow.

                 Bob Sciamanda <trebor@velocity.net> wrote :

> Perhaps it is precisely because we humans created these things that 
> they are finite, limited and ultimately of only passing value; ...

I remember times when cybernetics, a free creation of human mind, was 
debated. Is it mathematics or science? And there were those who called 
it pseudoscience. 

Some creations of human intellect are more deeply rooted in objective
reality than others. Physics is so deeply rooted in it that we tend to
forget it is only a *reflection of reality* in our minds. Yes, our minds
(cells, blood, etc.) are also reality. But physical reality of minds is
a source of thinking. Thinking is a subjective reflection of reality. It 
can be correct (logical and effective) or incorrect (full of aberations 
and wrong predictions). But reality is always "correct"; if I am allowed 
to use this adjective. What I am trying to say is that sets of certain 
physical conditions always lead to certain consequences, at least at the 
macroscopic level. Our thinking about this is totally irrelevant.

Psychology is preoccupied with subjective aspects of human activities, 
such as sensing, thinking, feeling, etc. In that way it is very different 
from natural sciences. Likewise, "Computer science" can be seen as 
something quite different from geometry. An error-free product of 
geometrical reasoning always leads to a correct prediction. An error-free 
program, on the other hand,  can simulate anything, including totally 
impossible situations. 

I know that there are branches of mathematics which also have nothing to 
do with reality. But axioms of geometry are "very real". Geometry belongs
to theoretical physics, not to theoretical mathematics, I would tend to
think. The same is true for calculus we use.
                                                  Ludwik Kowalski

> Mathematics, like physics, is a human description of reality. It is
> the description (ie. Mathematics or Physics) which is human, not the
> reality being described.