> In modern physics of this type, where experimentation is not practical, the math is the physics
I think Feynmann would disagree with you.
I think Feynmann would disagree with you.
From a physical perspective the math, in this case, is moot. We have no data about what happens past the event horizon, so I could just as easily say that it encompasses a space filled with tiny pink unicorns which exhale confetti and it would be just as meaningful.
What we know is that something different happens. So there's really no room for either the mathematicians or the physicists to speak with authority on what happens. What we're left with is very well-informed speculation about a really interesting region of space-time.
I cleverly added so many qualifiers that the comment is unfalsifiable:
> In modern physics of this type, where experimentation is not practical ….
Anyway I am a mathematician and not a physicist, so of course I am biased in my evaluation of the ability of mathematics to model reality.
To be fair to monocasa's objection (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17101892), the rebuttal was not of a claim that the culture of physics was mathematical but literally of my claim that (certain) physics was mathematics.