Jason, Disagree partly. Yes they are working within a euclidian space (and the i

Jason,

Disagree partly.

Yes they are working within a euclidian space (and the is a reason for that beyond the scope of a few tweets), but mathematics must always reduce a model. If we look at where physics has ‘gone wrong’ it’s precisely (beginning not only with Einstein-Bohr but with Cantor as well) that they are using math as a model, rather than a model which they attempt to reduce to a mathematical expression.

Einstein used pictures as analogies and platonized time and space. Borh said ‘just calculate’, because he couldn’t conceive of a *discrete* operational model to generalize into a “continuous* mathematical model.

Brower and Bridgman, less so Hilbert, and others tried to repair the ‘re-mystification’ of physics. Or what Hayek called the ‘new mysticism’.

Joscha Bach (@Plinz ) , as a good German (Continental), tends to mix models and metaphors in order to continue the german tradition of unifying experience and causality, when he communicates his thoughts.

But if you get past that ‘literary license’ the degree to which JB is insightful and correct is profound – and IMO he is also, as a good German, too humble and dutiful to assert those ideas with the same conviction as the quality of those ideas merits.

Reply addressees: @TheRealVerbz @Plinz