S. Chandrasekhar (1)
Auteur de Truth and Beauty: Aesthetics and Motivations in Science
Pour les autres auteurs qui s'appellent S. Chandrasekhar, voyez la page de désambigüisation.
S. Chandrasekhar (1) a été combiné avec Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar.
A propos de l'auteur
Crédit image: Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar [credit: University of Chicago]
Œuvres de S. Chandrasekhar
Les œuvres ont été combinées en Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar.
Selected Papers, Volume 6: The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes and of Colliding Plane Waves (Selected Papers, Vol.… (1991) 5 exemplaires
Selected Papers, Volume 3: Stochastic, Statistical, and Hydromagnetic Problems in Physics and Astronomy (1989) 4 exemplaires
A Quest for Perspectives: Selected Works of S. Chandreasekhar : With Commentary (2001) 2 exemplaires
Selected Papers, Volume 5: Relativistic Astrophysics (Selected Papers, S. Chandrasekhar) (v. 5) (1990) 2 exemplaires
Selected Papers, Volume 1: Stellar Structure and Stellar Atmospheres (Selected Papers S Chandrasekhar, Vol 1) (1989) 2 exemplaires
On stars, their evolution and their stability 1 exemplaire
Selected Papers, Volume 4: Plasma Physics, Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability, and Applications of the… (1989) 1 exemplaire
Oeuvres associées
Les œuvres ont été combinées en Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar.
Étiqueté
Partage des connaissances
Il n’existe pas encore de données Common Knowledge pour cet auteur. Vous pouvez aider.
Membres
Critiques
Prix et récompenses
Vous aimerez peut-être aussi
Auteurs associés
Statistiques
- Œuvres
- 22
- Aussi par
- 1
- Membres
- 424
- Popularité
- #57,554
- Évaluation
- 3.9
- Critiques
- 1
- ISBN
- 69
- Langues
- 3
Think of Darwin for instance: since his time, biology has become almost as mathematical as physics, which incidentally gives the lie to a remark once made by Kant (*) that 'there will never be a Newton of the grass blade.' In all probability, Darwin would not be able to understand many mathematical biology books written in the last 50 years, whereas i suspect that Newton, with some effort and a few rapid shifts in certain aspects of his world view, would probably be able to cope with everything in physics up to the early 1900's, before slowing down to digest relativity and quantum theory. Only slowing down though, and that mostly to learn the relevant 18th, 19th and 20th Century maths that postdated him:)
This then, or so it seems, is the peculiar difficulty with mathematics: I know nothing technical about music whatsoever, but I can appreciate the glory that is, for example, Bach without knowing how to read a note of music. But to appreciate calculus, and all that flows from it (**), I must learn calculus, and other mathematics besides. Which, I am always being told, is beyond most people apparently. I still think that people should make more of an effort though. If I can read, for instance, Milton's “Paradise Lost” (several times over the years), then the arts mob can be expected to cope with C. P. Snow, or Koestler's “The Sleepwalkers” can't they?
NB:
(*) Though i certainly think that the Critique of Pure Reason should be on the list somewhere.
(**) Rutherford, the discoverer of the structure of the atom, was fond of saying that 'there are two kinds of science: physics and stamp-collecting', but he was put in his place by the world's then leading mathematician, David Hilbert, who, on hearing of this, replied: 'physics is too difficult to leave to physicists; it can only be done properly by mathematicians.'… (plus d'informations)