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]

[Phys-l] Reality versus models of realty



SORRY FOR TYPING ERRORS IN MY LAST MESSAGE. THIS MESSAGE IS THE REPLACEMENT.

1) I asked: "Do bonds exist in nature or do they exist only in our models of nature?"

William Robertson replied: "A philosophical question, I think. What is real and what isn't real?"

2) Here is what I think:

Yes, it was a philosophical question. But this question is probably worth discussing here. Yes, I know that there are many philosophical questions that should not be discussed here.

I would say that real is what would exist if all humans disappeared. Planets, for example, are real. Kepler's laws, Newton laws, etc, are models humans created to explain planetary motions.. I am not a chemist but think that bonds are components of models. Atoms, on the other hand, are real. Who know which conceptual models will be invented to better describe atomic processes in the next century. But atoms will most likely behave in the same way as today.

3) In my opinion, a model which allows us to think in terms of the cause and effect relations can often be useful.

Ludwik
=========