🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6NOV199211570602@csa1.lbl.gov>, sichase@csa1.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE) writes...
> 
>>     However, getting back on track it is silly to say that a theory that in 
>>     some sense avoids internal inconsistency has passed some sort of 
>>     valid scientific 'test'.  It's like patting oneself on the back
>>     for not having assumed ii equals 3 and ii equals 5 at the same
>>     time.  
> 
>Perhaps it seems that way to a mechanical engineer.  However, I assure you
>that it really works that way in particle physics.  Internally consistent
>theories come much more easily in classical physics than in quantum field
>theory.  Over the fifty-odd years of particle physics history, internal 
>consistency has repeatedly been a useful way of discovering new physics.

Lest I get more hate mail from engineers, let me state for the record
that I did not intend to make a disparaging statement about Dale, or 
engineers in general.

I only meant to say that although it might seem silly to someone who's
daily work is in classical physics, mathematical consistency is a very 
valuable guide for searching out physically correct models in particle
physics.  It is not logically necessary for this to be the case, but 
I know from long experience that it is so.

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"It is not a simple life to be a single cell,
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		 although I have no right to say so, having
				 been a single cell so long ago myself that I 
				 have no memory at all of that stage of my 
				 life." - Lewis Thomas