>Physics is mathematical model building. The model has to be simple enough to
>solve but complicated enough to answer the questions posed. Models in
>cosmology treat all the galaxies as spread out into a uniform mass density.
>The model may be terrible for the questions you want to ask but is perfectly
>good to study the dynamical evolution of the whole universe! Remember that a
>mathematical model is like a map of a city. The map is not the city, but it
>certainly is useful to get you from one place to anther.
But this is exactly the point I am trying to make. Physics, that you hold
up as the highest of sciences, is really the science of simple systems. It
doesn't work with complexity. Biological systems are very, very complex,
even more complex than the galaxy of stars. But anti-evolutionists want
biology to make exact predictions when physics can't make predictions in a
complex system either.
>Mathematical models always yield exact numerical results. Mathematical
>dynamical models yield exact solutions albeit for short periods of time if
>there is sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Do not confuse models
>with the real thing! Science is model building. Evolutionary theory uses no
>math. Physics does!!!
Evolutionary theory sure does use math. Have you never heard of population
dynamics, the logistics equation, Hardy-Weinberg, the equations of
chemistry, and others. I am sure that the biologists could do a better job
than I. The assertion that biology doesn't use math is ... well, wrong.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm