bryjnar comments on What science needs - Less Wrong

42 Post author: PhilGoetz 02 December 2012 10:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (83)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: bryjnar 03 December 2012 02:08:16AM 6 points [-]

Alternatively, scientific problems might have got a lot harder! Compare the sheer amount of maths needed to understand quantum mechanics compared to something like gravitation.

(and I'm assuming you're taking into account inflation etc.)

Comment author: CronoDAS 03 December 2012 02:41:14AM 0 points [-]

As far as I know, general relativity isn't any mathematically simpler than quantum mechanics is.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 03 December 2012 02:45:43AM 7 points [-]

I think in context bryjnar meant simply Newtonian gravity.

Comment author: bryjnar 03 December 2012 11:05:51PM 2 points [-]

Yep.

Comment author: [deleted] 03 December 2012 05:12:33PM 2 points [-]

You ought to compare it to quantum field theory, not to non-relativistic quantum mechanics.