Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
|
There it is again, ... the pragmatic test of truth, but not the ultimate truth of the knowledge of origins and fails. Cannot explain "why" the constants work and cannot be entirely certain they are in fact constant. It works, so therefore it is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
Seems like things have never been better as far as automotive aerodynamic math.
Multi-core processors are routinely taking on the full, 3D Navier-Stokes Equation.
CFD is already so good, ( if you have the time to wait) that it will basically do whatever a full-scale wind tunnel will do. And without dimming the city lights.
If you want to land a manmade satellite on another planet or asteroid, the math is plenty capable.
Computers will only get better, faster.
|
Yeah, I see the pragmatic test of truth again: it works, so it is "true" ... our math technology is good at technology and not so good at larger human questions about origins and meaning and future.
I guess the answer to my question really is that such "flaws" in math may not be all that significant to automotive and transport tech... unless we focus alot on the meaning, ethics, beauty, and the great "WHY" of such tech. A post-humanist approach.