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: [Phys-l] (no subject)



Hello all:

I would tell the student that science describes and explains the natural world. Since there are no "theoretically unstoppable objects" or "theoretically unmovable objects" in nature, this question is outside the boundaries of science. I suggest philosophy as the appropriate area of knowledge to address it.

Wilson J. González-Espada, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Science
Department of Earth and Space Sciences
College of Science and Technology
Morehead State University
405A Lappin Hall
Morehead, KY 40351
Office: 606-783-2927
Dept: 606-783-2381
Fax: 606-783-5002
w.gonzalez-espada@moreheadstate.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Blais
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:40 AM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] (no subject)

On Feb 23, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Connie Tyree wrote:

A student posed the following question: What would happen if a
theoretically unstoppable object collides with a theoretically unmovable
object? He predicts everything...the world...would end. I know the world
will not end...what is the opinion of this group?

Connie L Tyree


I would say that in theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they're not.

I would add that the question is not defined, that the terms are not defined (there is no such thing as a theoretically unstoppable object, for example...the concept itself is not well defined). thus, any result is possible but no result is derivable.


bb

--
Brian Blais
bblais@bryant.edu
http://web.bryant.edu/~bblais
http://bblais.blogspot.com/



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l