/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16179079]

Theoretical physics is much harder than pure math.

[Anonymous No.16179081]

You are a mentally ill deranged subhuman who doesn't knows his place

[Anonymous No.16179083]

>>16179081
>You are a mentally ill deranged subhuman who doesn't knows his place
Cry more shitjeet

[Anonymous No.16179086]

>>16179079
This is true.

[Anonymous No.16179087]

>>16179079
Theoretical physics is pure math. It certainly has nothing to do with material reality.

[Anonymous No.16179099]

>>16179079
Kek this would trigger mathfags too hard.

[Anonymous No.16179124]

>>16179086
>>16179087
>>16179099
Explain, anons

[Anonymous No.16179141]

>>16179124
Hamilton's principle of least action is an axiomatic assertion from which we base the rest of classical mechanics.
The idea that the "true path" an object takes must correspond to the saddle point on the variational is something we've axiomatically asserted, not something that actually is tied to material reality.

Basically all of theoretical physics corresponds to sets of mathematical axioms that we develop because they "look right" and can never empirically verify because there are always some amount of measurement and process uncertainties.

[Anonymous No.16179144]

>>16179079
Agreed.
t. CStranny

[Anonymous No.16179151]

9+10=21 , in my theoretical realm.

[Anonymous No.16179404]

Theoretical physics has copied the mistakes of pure math. As long as physicist don't get rid of "complex numbers" their models will always be wrong.

[Anonymous No.16179434]

>>16179079
As if [math] \mathbb{THE~PHENOTYPE} [/math] wasn't proof of this already