Re: Date's First Great Blunder
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 23:10:58 +0100
In message <c0e3f26e.0404200523.618f43e2_at_posting.google.com>, Tony
>> > On the other hand, to quote Wikipedia: "Classical mechanics produces
>> > very accurate results within the domain of everyday experience.
>> No one is arguing that Classical Mechanics isn't accurate enough for
>> the scope of a human's typical everday experience. You missed the
>I don't think I did actually. Wol was arguing that Classical
>Mechanics "doesn't tally with reality" period.
See below ...
>> > In other words, it DOES tally with reality except in esoteric domains
>> > outside the realm of everyday life.
>> Excuse me but it is a human's perception of everyday life that is
>> ESOTERIC (in the scope of the universe or do you perceive that the
>> universe revolves around you :)
>In everyday life, the deviations of reality from the Classical
>Mechanics model just don't matter. They only matter to cosmologists
>and particle physicist, who form a small (which is not to say
>unimportant) minority. That is what esoteric MEANS. Look it up!
You've just proved my point :-)
"The deviations of reality from the Classical Mechanics model just don't matter". I would completely agree with you, but you've just admitted that those deviations DO exist. Those deviations prove my point that Classical Mechanics does not tally (agree) with reality.
Yes I'm being pedantic. But the thing is, with Mechanics, we know enough to know that the discrepancy can safely be ignored.
-- Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk HEX wondered how much he should tell the Wizards. He felt it would not be a good idea to burden them with too much input. Hex always thought of his reports as Lies-to-People. The Science of Discworld : (c) Terry Pratchett 1999Received on Fri Apr 23 2004 - 00:10:58 CEST