Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 01:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
Author: William Beaty
Subject: Re: Nature of Physics..
On Sat, 1 May 2004, Cathy Mariotti Ezrailson wrote:
> >From philosophers like Ronald Giere to physicists Robert Karplus to
> >Paul Black, definitions of the nature of physics seems to slip through
> >my fingers -- none is wholly satisfying. Maybe I have just been working
> >too hard, becoming addled through my endeavors.
This is a very well-known problem, but usually expressed in the question
"What *IS* science anyway?" Asking about physics, bio, chem, etc., is
still asking the same question.
I think you're definition is right on. After watching several debates
about this, I see that the boundaries put around the concept "science" or
"physics" are not determined by the external world; they are determined by
the participants. So... physics is what physicists do, and physics is
what physicists say it is.
(((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
From email@example.com Mon May 3 08:48:58 2004