Message-Id: <l03102800b371d277e2d0@[153.90.236.25]>
In-Reply-To: <374B1E64.7B9A@redshift.com>
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:50:54 -0600
To: "Pinhole Listserv" <pinhole@exploratorium.edu>
From: Steven Eiger <eiger@montana.edu>
Subject: Re: pinhole Re: Inverse Squares
>I'm curious. How do the mathematical models of spheres, triangles and
>areas, answer the question why? Isn't the real answer because that's the
>way it is. Physics cannot answer the question why, only how things work
>is explained.
Perhaps the deepest questions can not be answered as to why. But if one
accepts just a few basic principles, then the implications can often be
explained. While we might not understand why electrical forces either
attract or repel, once we accept that, then we can understand how a car
works. I think the inverse suare laws fit into that "application" type of
question. It seems as if physicists are trying, to reduce the number of
things taken on faith to a minimum. Feynman in his book QED, and in his
other books talks about these ultimate questions, and that it is still
useful to know how things behave even if we do not know why; but I think he
would also argue that beyond the basic set of assumptions, one can answer a
lot of "whys". While it is true that it is unknown why mass has inertia,
it is reasonable that two equal masses put together will have twice the
inertia ( I wonder if this is true considering general relativity). So I
believe that outside of a handful of things, most things, equations can be
explained. I also suspect that with time the number of these presently
unfathomable items will decrease. Steve Eiger
Steven Eiger, Ph.D.
Departments of Biology and the WWAMI Medical Education Program
Montana State University - Bozeman
Bozeman, MT 59717-3460
Voice: (406) 994-5672
E-mail: eiger@montana.edu
FAX: (406) 994-3190