twiffy comments on Many Weak Arguments vs. One Relatively Strong Argument - Less Wrong

20 Post author: JonahSinick 04 June 2013 03:32AM

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

Comments (86)

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

Comment author: twiffy 18 June 2013 06:58:22PM 0 points [-]

As a tangent, I think it's relatively clear both how physicists tend to think differently from mathematicians, and how they came up with path-integration-like techniques in QFT. In both math and physics, researchers will come up with an idea based on intuition, and then verify the idea appropriately. In math the correct notion of verification is proof; in physics it's experimentation (with proof an acceptable second). This method of verification has a cognitive feedback loop to how the researcher's intuition works. In particular physicists have intuition that's based on physical intuition and (generally) a thoroughly imprecise understanding of math, so that from this perspective, using integral-like techniques without any established mathematical underpinnings is intuitively completely plausible. Mathematicians would shirk away from this almost immediately as their intuition would hit the brick wall of "no theoretical foundation".