To: |
"[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|

From: |
"Sharma, Ravi" <Ravi.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx> |

Date: |
Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:07:36 -0700 |

Message-id: |
<D09FFCFB3952074082D4280BC24EAFA89B86C2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |

John Excellent observations! In other older cultures where whole numbers and fractions originated, prime, decimal, fractals were documented. Goedel's theorem related logic reasoning based but ambiguous or wrong conclusions are available as well (for example Philosophy / metaphysics branches such as Nyaya, Sankhya). (01) Coming to Physicists: They have to work with best known physical laws - sometimes these are very clear and mathematically definable, other times these have not yet been understood enough to subject them to rigor of math or even complete logic. For physicists there is notion of models that closely describe physical world, often these are revised as more experimental data are included and often experimental data are differently collected requiring a loopback and recycling of old models and math. (02) All said and done Mathematics has many-many-times rescued physicists by their discovering it from past work of mathematicians and thus being able to improve accuracies, and profound examples are relativity, particle theory, magneto-hydrodynamics and CFD just to name a few but multiple math and computer simulations techniques allow us to better understand the physics relating to natural phenomena such as weather! Thanks. (03) Ravi (04) (Dr. Ravi Sharma) Senior Enterprise Architect (05) Vangent, Inc. Technology Excellence Center (TEC) (06) 8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 310, Vienna VA 22182 (o) 703-827-0638, (c) 313-204-1740 www.vangent.com (07) -----Original Message----- From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:25 AM To: [ontolog-forum] Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Axiomatic ontology (08) Avril, (09) In a sense, any application of mathematics, could, in principle, be axiomatized. But I recall a comment made by a physicist about axiom systems such as von Neumann's: (010) Physicists don't do axioms. (011) He did not mean that physicists don't use mathematics. What he meant is that physicists have a large number of physical principles stated in mathematical form, and a large toolkit of mathematical techniques. (012) For any particular problem, they pick and choose from those resources to assemble a mathematical model that characterizes some aspect of the universe. Then they use math to compute some prediction about how that model would evolve over time. For any such model and computation, it is possible to list every starting formula and call that list the "axioms" for that problem. But it would be a different list for each case. (013) AS> We have to separate two things: > > |

Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Axiomatic ontology, John F. Sowa |
---|---|

Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Axiomatic ontology, Avril Styrman |

Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Axiomatic ontology, John F. Sowa |

Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Axiomatic ontology, Pat Hayes |

Indexes: | [Date]
[Thread]
[Top]
[All Lists] |