One of the foundational myths of modern science, by the way, is that "Mathematics is the language of nature and that, therefore, if you don't speak math, you can't do science."
To forestall, a lot of churn, I should add that I am not contemptuous of measurement, or experiment, or mathematics. But the reality of science is that 1) it proceeds by intuitive leaps as much as it does by measurement/experiment and 2) the numbers are only a beginning (or sometimes a diversion) as they always have to be interpreted because when you run an experiment, you get all kinds of numbers, some of them you include in your data; some you don't.
Joanna
andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>In my opinion, someone without the math can understand
>the physics (pop biolog, etc.) only as well as a blind
>person can understand painting. There's a reason you
>have to put this stuff in math language to make it go.
>That doeesn't mean ppopular translation out of math
>isn't possible for general interest purposes. Of
>course I have the bias of having made the commitmebt
>to lerarn the math at great personal cost, which I
>have now all forgotten -- the math, not the costs.
>
>Most of the science studies crowd are morons.
>
>--- Daniel Davies <d_squared_2002 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>From: andie nachgeborenen
>>>
>>>
>><andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>>These were not the science-free ignoramuses of
>>>
>>>
>>today's
>>
>>
>>>science studies crowd
>>>
>>>
>>bad luck in the timing of picking this particular
>>week to repeat this rather
>>dull slur on sociologists of science; Harry Collins
>>of Cardiff University
>>recently passed a version of the Turing Test for
>>physicists; he submitted
>>answers to seven questions on gravity waves which
>>convinced a panel of
>>independent judges that he was a physicist (and that
>>the physicist who also
>>submitted answers wasn't). He was able to do this
>>because he's spent the last
>>thirty years hanging around the gravitational waves
>>community in order to carry
>>out science studies on the sociology of new
>>discoveries. I suppose this falls
>>under the heading of "no true Scotsman" (which it
>>does; he's a Welshman).
>>
>>http://www.slate.com/id/2150974/fr/rss/
>>
>>It is actually incredibly interesting, because it
>>confirms a prejudice of mine;
>>that it is possible to understand all of this
>>science stuff at the highest
>>level without going through the details of how to
>>calculate the equations, as
>>long as you keep a clear head and are prepared to
>>apply yourself. Scientists
>>aren't demigods and Master of Reality - they're just
>>people who did a science
>>degree. Lots of them seem to have very little
>>understanding of the underlying
>>science, as opposed to the manipulation of
>>particular fashionable calculations;
>>there are plenty of "science-free ignoramuses"
>>holding down jobs in physics
>>departments, just as the economics departments are
>>chock full of people who
>>don't know anything about economics.
>>
>>best
>>dd
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>___________________________________________________________
>
>
>>Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is
>>radically easier to use" - The Wall Street Journal
>>http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
>>___________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20061010/936350b5/attachment.htm>