/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8312060
As an astrophysicist I have to ask;
What the fuck are you talking about? That 'approximation' hold true for all non-relativistic inertial frames which is significantly more quantifiable and correct at describing reality than the largely observable and non-formulaic* fields of meteorology and geophysics. Math trumps observation when it comes to predictive models every time when the models describe reality so accurately that deviations literally can't be seen without approaching the most extreme physical parameters.

*geophysics while having many models and formulas are intrinsically less accurate due to chaotic properties and the large number of variables that can't be easily obtained or at all and often have non-analytical models which are by definition less accurate than analytical models.