On 13 Jan 2021 20:56:23 GMT
TimS  wrote:

> On 13 Jan 2021 at 19:46:28 GMT, The Natural Philosopher

> > Is Einstein truth, or just a model? - if truth then how come we
> > believed in Newton?
>
> Newton's gravity did as good a job as could be measured against at the
> time. The anomaly pointed up by the precession of the axis of Mercury's

 Yes it is a model that delivers a *very* good approximation to
observation.

> orbit hadn't been noticed yet, and it was a *huge* advance on what went
> before.

 For sure.

> Remember also that if you simplify Einstein's theory (presumably by
> setting speed of light to infinity), then AIUI Einstein's theory
> simplifies down to exactly Newton. So there's no real conflict.

 That is indeed true, and being in close agreement to Newton is a
requirement for any model of dynamics because that is a very good
approximation to observation.

 However we can be quite certain that none of Newtonian Mechanics,
Special Relativity, General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, String
Theory ... are in fact accurate descriptions of how the universe really
works because *all* of them fail to match observation under some
conditions. So we do *not* have a handle on 'the truth' just some pretty
good looking approximations.

 The faith part in science comes in with the assumption that it is
possible to construct ever more accurate models because we are modelling
something that really does behave predictably. There is no way of knowing
that the universe does behave predictably everywhere and at all times, but
if it doesn't then we can't model it so that is a useful assumption that
has so far not been invalidated.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05