CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I'm pretty sure physics is merely a derivation of higher level math, essentially applied calculus. And then you can continue from there: chemistry is applied physics, biology is applied chemistry, psychology is applied biology, etc.
Physics uses math to quantify observations and to make predictions. Physics, and other sciences exist independent of the mathematics that they apply for these purposes. There are areas where various scientific disciplines interact and overlap, particle physics has a lot in common with chemistry and physics of particles contributes to our understanding of chemistry but that doesn't mean that chemistry is a sub field of physics. Biology certainly isn't a sub field of chemistry, bio-chemistry is the field where principles of chemistry are applied to life but a great deal of biology is observation of behavior which has little to do with chemistry in application.
We're not dealing with digital systems here, abstraction and inheritance don't really apply.
No it doesn't. You can still talk about velocities, forces, torques, etc without discussing the mathematical representations of these things. Math is a tool that is used to give a common and concrete basis of comparison.
How do you use math without physics? It seems to me that math on its own is quite useless to the world. You have to apply mathematics with, say, PHYSICS, for it to hold any value what-so-ever. (;
Well there's arithmetic, or course. There's also simple graphs and rates of change, which can be used to model population growth and decline. Living life without any background in physics is not very difficult (assuming it has no effect on getting into college). Having no background in math is going to make life very difficult: how can you control your finances, bills, tips, etc?
But the debate isn't titled "Which is a better subject for someone with the IQ of a 10 year old who can only learn one of these two subjects before being thrown out into the world?" The debate merely asks "Is Physics a better subject than Maths?" So assuming ceteris perabis, Physics is a much better subject than Maths.
Well in all honesty, this debate is purely about opinion, not fact. My opinion is that math is better. And I believe that because I enjoy it more and I realized that when I did physics, I also did math. Your opinion is that physics is more interesting. No right or wrong. ;)
On a side note, do you know who the hell has been downvoting arguments in this debate? Pretty lousy.... :|
Oh, and I think the average citizen can live their entire life without knowing that:
P(o) = Pe^(rt)
or that:
P(0) = P(1+r/n)^(nt).
I mean, those are just things that an average person would never need to know in life, thus invalidating your statement about maths being more useful in day-to-day life. (;
Certain topics in Mathematics are applied in physics. Events and models that exist in nature (forces between two massive bodies) are beyond curricular study in mathematics; therefore a new mathematical scheme (equations) had to be devised by physicists to describe physical events symbolically.
That is what a Doctorate of Philosophy degree provides (at least it should), a synthesis and a quest for the inter-relationship of all knowledge in multiple disciplines within similiar domains.
So the original claim as to whether 'physics is a better subject than math' is a matter of personal taste and experience.
Well I find that math should end with an "s" because there are many MANY branches of mathematics. So for the same reason that Physics ends with an "s", math should too. Actually, I think I'm going to start saying "maths" instead of "math". It just makes more sense.
And, just to clarify, Maths is Physics' bitch. See? You put the apostrophe at the end of a word that ends with an "s", such as maths.
Physics isn't shorthand. Math is an abbreviation of mathematics. When you truncate, you don't typically cutout the middle, but keep the end. You cut off the whole end.
I never said Physics was shorthand. All I said was it ends in an "s"....
And if someone saw math and didn't know it stood for mathematics (plural), then they would probably think that math is just one concrete thing, which it isn't.
Of course not, it's just plain obvious. Math comes into play in today's life way more than physics and plus physics is absolutely nothing without math!
From the point of purity of science, mathematics is rigorous and exact. Mathematical proof is total and most scientific in that it the truth that it explains can be arrived at by any one, anywhere and at any time. Physics uses a lot of mathematics and indeed the language of advanced physics is mathematics. However, in some cases, physics resorts to iteration and approximations to explain the observations, which therefore is considered as not as rigorous as mathematics. For example, in physics you derive the period of oscillation of a simple pendulum and you "assume that the string has no mass ". In maths you denote the ratio of circumference to diameter of a circle as pi and work with it, whereas you use the figure 3.143 in physics.
Mathematics, trains the mind to be more rigorous and uncompromising since it demands absolute accuracy
Well I think that although Physics involves math, it is not math. Physics is the study of the physical environment, so, basically, how things work. Math, on its own, holds no value what-so-ever. Applied mathematics is the only useful form of mathematics. All other math sucks. Physics is just freaking awesome in its entirety; I mean, we did create Dr. Manhatten with physics. (;
Firstly, math appeared only as an applied tool for physics, while investigating nature.
Great example - Newton invented Calculus as a part of his investigations in physics of motion.
Secondly, ALL math structures depend on real world. All the idealizations - they are idealizations of real structures, and even the logic - is a derivative of causality of the Universe.
Also, physicists are just more creative and not such a boring dudes. Considering the fact that in physics there are a lot of math as an instrument - they already know math quite well. But mathematicians don't even understand physics very often.
Finally, as Richard Feynman said:
"Physics is to mathematics like sex is to masturbation".
math is a language which is used to efficiently describe physics, to say that one is better than the other, is not at all possible, as physics can't exist without maths and only math cannot explain to us what the universe is... which physics is, to an extent..