This is an opinion ... but it is clear in Kip thorns book that he agrees ...

__________________
http://www.whatisorganicliving.com
http://www.cancerfightforums.com/forum/
http://www.nycbrownies.com
"Banned by BAUT" Alumni (2008)

I would argue against that proposition. Debating disallows negligently making things up and presenting them as facts.

__________________
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

hah ...

__________________
http://www.whatisorganicliving.com
http://www.cancerfightforums.com/forum/
http://www.nycbrownies.com
"Banned by BAUT" Alumni (2008)

Tommac already cited Kip Thorne's book, chapter Two, as evidence of Einstein's non-dominance in maths.
But Tommac, you most certainly cannot 'groove' on Chopin as you suggest. The results would be laughable, I'm chuckling as I type.

math is the language of physics. Can you understand physics in other ways? Sure but if you know the maths behind a concept you'll understand the concept even better.

Take, for example you favorite concepts, gravity and Black Holes. You have, on a number of occasions made claims that at first glance might seem probable, if you don't understand the math. When shown the facts and math most people, I would hope, would change their understanding of the universe. It hopefully will even given them a better mental picture of what is going on, without the maths.

You can have an understanding of it....but that doesn't mean you'll make accurate conclusions based on your understanding.

Take Gravity. Many people understand the "funnel" analogy of gravity. Less people understand many of the implications of this. For example I'd wager most people still think that if our sun was a black hole that the earth would get sucked in. Look how many people are worried about the LHC producing a BH with the mass of 2 alpha particles. They have an understanding of a BH but the maths would show them that they have nothing to worry about from a BH that size.

Math is really good at figuring trajectories of objects moving through space with object weight/densities/momentum in mind to calculate gravitational forces while circumnavigating the Galaxy...

It is also real good for giving the correct change to a customer while a cashier.

__________________
osiris

Imagine a laser sitting in a shoebox. Each photon has the same wavelength, and is discrete. The shoebox has dimensions of your choosing. Show, using special relativity, that E=mc².

It's a simple derivation that a high schooler should be able to solve.

Try it, and then I can try it myself if you want.

Hint: give the box a certain mass and use momentum for your calculations.

Much as I hate to spoil a pithy, well-constructed and funny post with tedious detail... the cashier is using arithmetic.

Have you ever read his writings? I'm sure the Einstein would pass the ATM with flying colours, you know why? Because he passed the ATM back in 1905. His ideas where ATM and he articulated the concepts very well to include complex equations.

go to The Einstein Archives look at his writings and then come back and tell us how he avoided maths.

I don't know where you are getting your information. Perhaps you could back up your claims with some evidence?

our galaxy is but a tiny spec of snow in a snow-globe siting upon the desk of our creator.

__________________
osiris

I am becoming intolerant of the argumentative position seen in this forum... I can not understand why you would want to argue about what level of mathematics the head of the maths., department had. and will now try to clear this stupidity.
As has been noted. Mathematics is the mechanics of physics. Understanding some fundermental mathematics is going to help you conceptualise or make work your theories. That space vehicle descending to orbit a gas giant does need to be slowed to achieve this. A engine burn of some duration will be required. All of which is rocket science that might make me wince at the sight of but for the adept mathematician its just another problem. With the proper mathematics its a doodle....

Yeah, I've wondered what's the minumum maths a layman interested in science should be expected to know - have tried and failed to teach myself calculus.

Given those A-left-home-an-hour-after-B-and-they-drove-towards-each-other problems I always used trial and error, where each would be after one hour etc, and it seemed to work. This approach might not work when plotting a probe's trajectory.

Good skills!

__________________
Yonder is Dubhe seen on Earth tonight as it was in the days of Grover Cleveland's presidency whereas this way is Deneb seen as it was in the lifetime of Muhammed . If one somehow travelled to Deneb at very close to c then whenever you looked back you'd measure Earth as closer to you than the distance you would simultaneously measure between Earth and Dubhe.

Since we are made out of star stuff that desk must be pretty darn big.

Ummm have you forgot where you've said this

Clearly not the sign of a "master debater" or "cunning linguist".

yes that was funny the first time I saw it... could we remember the OP ?
There is such a thing as to much mathematics... I some times turn away from discussion here for that reason. It makes my head hurt. BUT. It is essential that science fact is verifiable by testing and provable by the logic. Mathematics is part of the way that is done. If its done well.

I understand where you are coming. There are tons of things that the math is way over my head. When it comes to GR and SR I've been more interested in the math side after getting the concepts explained to me over and over while watching people like Prof Muller at UC Berkeley describe it. If you don't understand the concept full stop the math isn't probably going to help you but if you have a basic understanding of the concept then the math can really make the concept solid.

For example it shows you just how close to a 1 solar mass black hole you would have to get to get time to really slow down for you and then at that point why the tidal forces would be ripping you apart.

If you are really interested in the topic then the maths becomes not only easier but more enjoyable.

Note to tommac : "maths" is a valid short form of the word mathematics (it is an American saying to abbreviate the plural word mathematics" to just math). In reality when you talk about maths you are talking about different types of math. IE you might employ algebra, calculus and geometry in the solution of of a problem. Next time you try to be a grammar Nazi tommac you should actually understand the word usage you are about to criticize.

I failed.

I can calculate the impact point of a fired artillery shell through its trajectory..

but when it comes to algebra...

I can see it in my head, but can not put it down upon paper.

__________________
osiris

To quote an early professor "Mathematics is the study of any kind of order that the human mind can recognize."

Mathematics is useful insofar as one's mind is capable of recognizing order and analyzing it using logic.

That makes it more useful to some people than to others.

Were I to grasp mathematics with understanding...

I could control Time and Space!

__________________
osiris

Really? I guess the many who do grasp mathematics have yet to reach the "understanding" phase, commensurate with the "controlling Time and Space!" phase.

Unless Time and Space are two puppies from the same litter...

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

Put the understanding down and step back from the mathematics... or does the understanding want to grasp the maths... ? No Valkyrie, that's not what you want. Is it ?
Time and space can never be controlled. Understood yes.

This is what Tom is referring to. From 'Black Holes & Time Warps'
by Kip S. Thorne, chapter 2:
-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"I find astronomy very interesting, but I wouldn't if I thought we
were just going to sit here and look." -- "Van Rijn"

"The other planets? Well, they just happen to be there, but the
point of rockets is to explore them!" -- Kai Yeves

I consider mathematics to be an application of logic. When logic is applied
to concepts of number or quantity or value, math is the result. It is possible
to understand principles of physics without understanding the mathematical
relations that describe the principles. A four-year-old knows that an egg
will break if dropped onto a hard floor, but will not break if dropped onto a
soft pillow. That is physics.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"I find astronomy very interesting, but I wouldn't if I thought we
were just going to sit here and look." -- "Van Rijn"

"The other planets? Well, they just happen to be there, but the
point of rockets is to explore them!" -- Kai Yeves

Our whole world is basically made up of numbers. We need only turn those numbers into words if we are to make sense of things. And math is the key for this.

__________________
"Science is physics and astronomy." -Me
"There is absolutely no law in physics that prevents time travel." -Dr. Michio Kaku

No, math is to physics as letters are to writing. Math is absolutely required for any physics at all. Physics without math is just philosophy, and no one builds space ships, transistors, computers, understands black holes, radiation, quarks, or builds bridges with philosophy .

No, absolutely not! That's like saying you can read without knowing letters. You can't. By definition. If you think you can, you're really doing something else.

Yeah, you have to keep into context what scientists say. Einstein was competing with people like Hilbert to develop GR. Saying Einstein "wasn't good" at math is like saying "I don't know the bible as well as the Pope." That by no means implies that you don't know every word of it!

The only people who can possibly think he's not good at math have clearly never read (or never understood) a single one of his papers.

Edit:
I once had a first year undergrad trap me and ask "so, what math would I need to learn for string theory?"
Answer: "All of it"
"No, really, what do I need to learn?"
"Really, all of it. And most of physics."
"No, really, what topics"
"Algebra, geometry, trig, calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, advanced calculus, multivariable calculus, real analysis, ........., algebraic topology, ......, and a few other things"
"Oh."

__________________
This isn't right, this isn't even wrong.
- Wolfgang Pauli

Although "song" is unquestionably not the right word, can you
suggest a better word in English? I have many times been faced
with the dilemma of finding a word for chunks of music. "Pieces"?
"Compositions"? "Works"? "Numbers"? "Songs"? They are all either
too general or too specific. I don't know of any word that is much
better than "song". Should Tom have said, "the composition that
he composed"?

Is there a good term in Deutsch?

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"I find astronomy very interesting, but I wouldn't if I thought we
were just going to sit here and look." -- "Van Rijn"

"The other planets? Well, they just happen to be there, but the
point of rockets is to explore them!" -- Kai Yeves

Take my word as a native English speaker who has spent his entire life heavily involved in classical music: "piece" is the correct word in this case, i.e. for a short piece by Chopin. Just ask any pianist.

"Number" was originally used by jazz musicians who had their sheet music ordered by numbers. The band leader would call out "47!" instead of "In the Mood!"

Classical musicians rarely speak of "numbers" or "songs," except for special cases.

For this case "Stück" would be correct.

__________________
Ach, mein Sinn, wo willst du endlich hin, wo soll ich mich erquicken? Bleib' ich hier, oder wünsch' ich mir Berg und Hügel auf den Rücken?
Bei der Welt ist gar kein Rat, und im Herzen steh'n die Schmerzen meiner Missetat, weil der Knecht den Herrn verleugnet hat.

I can't believe that someone could possibly ask what is good about math.

You can not build a theory in physics without math. I have had calculus (integral and differential), LaPlace transforms, etc.

It is only ATMers who think they can come up with physics "theories" with absolutely no mathematical background. Absolutely ridiculous.

Saying that Einstein was not good at math is also absolutely ridiculous.

__________________
______________________________________________
“He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever”
Chinese proverb
"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence - and then success is sure." - Mark Twain.

What math? At least algebra and calculus (integrals and differentials).

You might consider yourself a master debater and a cunning linguist, but I would like to see this modest self-assessment come from an unbiased, independent source. Any takers out there on the board to confirm this?

__________________
______________________________________________
“He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes; he who does not ask a question remains a fool forever”
Chinese proverb
"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence - and then success is sure." - Mark Twain.