Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!rutgers!argos.montclair.edu!hubey
From: hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu (H. M. Hubey)
Subject: Re: Was: (Re: Large-scale quantum & Penrose) Physical Law & Freedom
Message-ID: <hubey.783041153@pegasus.montclair.edu>
Sender: root@argos.montclair.edu (Operator)
Organization: SCInet @ Montclair State
References: <Cx967I.LzF@sun2.iusb.indiana.edu> <kovskyCxo4yx.EE5@netcom.com> <Cxu1Dv.22n@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <kovskyCxz8zB.Dw2@netcom.com> <Cy6vEC.147@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 23:25:53 GMT
Lines: 48

pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:

>In article <kovskyCxz8zB.Dw2@netcom.com>, Bob Kovsky <kovsky@netcom.com> wrote:
>>Andrzej Pindor <pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>....
>>>You might have perhaps noticed that there is a lot of things which operate
>>>in natural environment but are built on the basis of laws derived 'under
>>>highly constrained conditions'. The "laws of physics" may not be "universal"
>>>in some sense, but not for the reasons you outline.
>>
>>	The closer conditions approach to laboratory conditions, the more 
>>accurate the "laws of physics".  Bridges, buildings and automobiles are 
>>within a per cent or so, but, I suggest, because they are engineered to 
>>approximate the highly constrained conditions under which physical laws 
>>were derived.  Medical procedures, where an attempt is made to apply 
>>laboratory conditions to the unlaboratory-like conditions of an animal's 
>>body, are much less accurate.  Laws of physics are not very useful in 
>>describing the market-place or the swamp.
>>
>Your view of operation of "law of physics" seems to be very limited. Similar
>claim could have been made 50 years ago concerning for instance making
>metallic alloys. Electronic theory of metals seemed totally inadequate to
>describe properties of "real" metalic systems. However, progress of theory
>and development of computational techniques allows now description and
>understanding of realistic metallic systems. The same applies to weather.
>Many "real" systems are very complicated and certainly idealized laboratory
>conditions may be inadequate in a sense of not fully reflecting this 
>complexity. There is no indication however, that anything else except 
>complexity is a problem. Steady progress in our abilities to deal with 
>complex systems leads to progress in understanding more and more realistic
>situations.


If I may add another example; during the last century for all practical 
purposes fluid dynamics of engineers and physicists had no connection. 
Not only could the Navier-Stokes eqs not be solved except for extremely
simple/idealized cases but even then the predictions were too far off to
be of any practical use. It was during the early part of this century that
Boundary Layer Theory of Prandl started to make the connection.

Now fluid dynamics has gone back to being a popular field to study
for physicists and mathematicians.


--
						-- Mark---
....we must realize that the infinite in the sense of an infinite totality, 
where we still find it used in deductive methods, is an illusion. Hilbert,1925
