What if the textbooks are right?

[WilbyInebriated]

this forum is an open space for anyone to express their opinion.If u wanted no discussion,why u started and followed one. PM is for personall messages,anything else put into wide post is an opening for debate.

Models,laws,teorems are all to make descriptive tasks and predictions easier about the things we already know.They r not to be a research apparatus per se,but can be build to suit some conditions occuring in nature.They may be unreliable in new conditions,may forsee false states or may ommit some of the circumstances.

It is just a tool like hammer or screwdriver.of course u will not be able to screw all of the possible screws with a given screwdriver,but its pretty good for the family of screws..and so on.

When they look suitable they r constantly tested in new conditions and corrected if needed.In the end u get pretty good design tool and u don't have to, for example ,cut 100 samples of wire and choose a one with the resistance u need.U can just calculate that the wire u need will be 1.4 m +/- 1cm,reducing the wasted material,time and effort..

Models are also ways to communicate between people( a common language).If u had only hand working people ,all of them will end up with different names for thing they do and tools they use.How do u think it would influence knowledge propagation?think of it as a standarisation enforcement(if u r more familiair with industry/business)..

Is it a theorem or a law?..who cares as long as it works(i don't have to know german name for screwdriver,but i can use it..)

Experimenting/building/tesing may find flawned models...models can open new possibilities to experimenting ..and the circle is round.

Relying on one or the other side of the barricade only is an obvious hinder and let u unflexible and mind-casted into numbers or tradition of operation..a healthy mix is what u need.

my post was specifically addressed to ernie, not spinner and not you.
but i'll play along once.

i care if it's a theorem or a law. why? because to describe thing as best we can, we can't be using multiple words that don't have the same meaning to describe that thing. further more using the word 'law' implies something entirely different than using the word 'theorem'.

and speaking of a common language, its YOU and ARE. and further more, try using the spell check once in a while when you attempt to communicate. when you are posting, that red line under a word usually means you misspelled it.

[Creativity]

thank u.I never saw this button before,now all problems will be solved in a fraction of a second and i learned something! what a day all of this seems more like a linguistic discrepancy than a real hinder to the science.I imagine i wake up tomorrow and all of the laws r theorems,cars r with 5 wheels and i m using trackball instead of the non existing mouse device to click on the "sprawdź pisowniÄ™" button because English is somehow not a common language in my dream...huh let be it  ;)At least my green tea has not changed

offtopic: those r grammatical rules not laws to stick to this subtle play of interpretations.We r all grown enough to see through the interpretations to the level of abstraction where it still makes a real difference.

[WilbyInebriated]

thank u.I never saw this button before,now all problems will be solved in a fraction of a second and i learned something! what a day all of this seems more like a linguistic discrepancy than a real hinder to the science.I imagine i wake up tomorrow and all of the laws r theorems,cars r with 5 wheels and i m using trackball instead of the non existing mouse device to click on the "sprawdź pisownię" button because English is somehow not a common language in my dream...huh let be it  ;)At least my green tea has not changed

offtopic: those r grammatical rules not laws to stick to this subtle play of interpretations.We r all grown enough to see through the interpretations to the level of abstraction where it still makes a real difference.

your comment has been disregarded since you can not bother yourself to speak the language we are using here.
my point remains. i specifically addressed ernie. not you, and not spinner so shut up. look at the post, see, it starts with, "thanks ERNIE".  note, not thanks spinner or thanks creativity or thanks tom dick or harry. impetuous small children interrupt conversations when they want attention...now go to your room until you can behave like a grownup.

[spinner]

your comment has been disregarded since you can not bother yourself to speak the language we are using here.
my point remains. i specifically addressed ernie. not you, and not spinner so shut up. look at the post, see, it starts with, "thanks ERNIE".  note, not thanks spinner or thanks creativity or thanks tom dick or harry. impetuous small children interrupt conversations when they want attention...now go to your room until you can behave like a grownup.

Well... Sorry, Wilby!
I didn't mean anything bad when I replied to your post (the one addressed to Carnot)..

I think you did the similar thing (replying to someones post without the explicit call) in the past?

I'm not interested in fights, so I'll try to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

[WilbyInebriated]

Well... Sorry, Wilby!
I didn't mean anything bad when I replied to your post (the one addressed to Carnot)..

I think you did the similar thing (replying to someones post without the explicit call) in the past?

I'm not interested in fights, so I'll try to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

i know, you just like to state the obvious, regardless of whether or not you are actually being spoken to at the time, don't you captain?
spinner maybe i have, aren't you doing the same at this very moment? so again, one more time for the cheap seats, shut up.
what i surely haven't done and surely won't do is, when someone tells me i'm interrupting or that their comment wasn't addressed to me, i'm not gonna reply with some asinine idea of how "it's an open forum"...