Can two electrons have the same location?

Of course theoretical physics takes existing theory that has been validated by experiment to build new models. Experimental physics then takes the new models to find a way to test them.

Both of these parts of physics are mathematical. Find any original scientific paper (rather than a description of the science written for lay people) either theoretical or experimental and you will find it is based in mathematics.

You are wrong about special relativity.



Special relativity was introduced by Einstein in a paper entitled "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper" ("On the electrodynamics of moving bodies"). You can read an English translation of the original here

http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/100/elecmovbodeng.pdf

From the very beginning Special Relativity (like any other Physical theory in the past 500 years) was based on a mathematical argument. It was proven to be a valid experiment when the mathematics of the theory made correct predictions when tested by experiment.

This wasn't something that was just made up by idle musing. Einstein studied extremely hard to master mathematics and to understand the work of the Physicists before him. He used rigorous mathematics to develop his theories which held up to the scrutiny of his peers.

Your idea that Einstein was just some random guy who came up with an idea is wrong. He was well trained, educated, studious and exact in his mathematics.

.

What does this mean? Are you suggesting that math proved that the axioms of special relativity are true?

That's not my idea, and I certainly never said otherwise. You seem to strongly favor straw man arguments, Max.

Of course Al was mathematically versed, and of course he had pondered a solution to existing questions--for many years in fact--before proposing his solution.

But that is a pure non-sequitur with respect to the point I'm making.

Yes, that is exactly right. (And the axioms themselves are mathematical statements; there is no other way other than math to understand, develop or test them.)

I asked:



In reply, you answered:



OK, then. You are exactly wrong, and by making that claim you have just shown how little you actually understand about physics in particular, and science in general.

So we disagree...

I will point out that the scientists who are sending robots to Mars, designing new airplanes and developing the semiconductor technology we are using right now to communicate all have the same education that I do (and that you seem to disdain).

Anyone with a science or technology education has taken a class that contains special relativity, and all of them were sent home the first week with a problem set of mathematical problems to solve.

What we are teaching scientists in school is based heavily on math.... and this seems to be working for them.

I am sorry that you disagree, but until someone can duplicate the amazing success that mathematics-based science has had in advancing our world and developing new technology... I don't think you have a very good argument.

Yeah, we do. And any well-informed physicist agrees with me, not you. Do some research if you think otherwise.



I'll bet they were! Aint that special!?

It's too bad more of them weren't sent home with a better understanding of exactly what they were solving for, the basis for seeking such solutions, and some understanding of the arbitrariness of the assumptions underlying the theory.