Physics versus Mathematics and Logic.

Let me concede right of the bat... I, least of all, could read enought to speak in a fully-educated way about the harmonics of the Universe.

In the meantime, as an allegory, I have enjoyed many a Vivaldi, or Bach Concerto. While listening, the harmonic operations exceed all of the powers of my intellect. I understand the Octave-structure to music, but it is not in fact necessary (how many mHz? I don't know). The numbers are only a deduction.

Wouldn't it be great if all science were as enjoyable as listening to a Bach Concerto?

So where are we? I think we know where we are, scholatically, and intellectually. But our fixation with requiring a measurement, a quantification, will only handicap our progress. The scientific certainties are merely a snap-shot, a slice of the spectrum (so to speak) of real phenomena.

My obscurity may be my wish that we trust in shared, universal concepts of meaning, which are revealed in more thatn text-book scholasticism, but all of our shared human experience; and progress from there with a magnanimous attitude.

Additional:
quote:
___________________________________________________________________________

The question is - can mathematics and logic account for real world physics?
___________________________________________________________________________

I might say "it cannot," if mathematics and logic are somehow intrinsic to the actual operations of real world physics. In other words, can you account for language using language?

If we consider that those tools are the only interaction points between the human intellect and the universe itself, it's a tough question.

quote:
____________________________________________________________________________
[re: mathematics and logic] ...their operations form a superset of Physical Reality. Isn't that another paradox? or is it not?
____________________________________________________________________________

It is not, obviously, if further observations are congruenous with their principles.

quote:
____________________________________________________________________________
Maybe to explain Physical Reality you need a language with one-to-one correspondence with Physical Reality.
____________________________________________________________________________

From antiquity, identified as mathematics... contemporaneously considering that quantum phenomena is as yet beyond present limits of observation, but not beyond the limits of mathematics.

quote:
____________________________________________________________________________
The domain is the question. What's the domain? Where is it? When? How?
____________________________________________________________________________

These questions are all answered by the notion of the universal applicicability of mathematics in all processes. Domain will not change the mathematical interrelations.

Therefore, following MM through to it's logical conclusions, observing the ambient nature of matter on infinite and infinitisemal scales, congruenous processes occur everywhere...; therefore, what is observable, has an existence "everywhere;" scale of distance and time merely intervenes.

Just an afterthought...

The forum title "Physics versus Mathematics and Logic," rings in my ears a little.

I though Physics was an interralation of mathematics and logic. Is there another Physics that is definable? Welcoming any answers.

quote:
____________________________________________________________________________
Interesting view. Sounds like a Platonist.
____________________________________________________________________________

I don't consider myself a Platonist, or a Constructionist, or an eclectic.

My reply is that whatever the Universe is, I consider my intellect it's reflection, as you should yours. I am unable to operate outside of it's already-existing operations.

And in my intellect, I perceive that all matter operates in the same reflective manner; just as a hypothesised graviton, photon, or any other particle/wave causes a reflection of force upon matter in all elastic interractions.

Please inject "time" into the above; therein you find the "soul."