Those edit and quote buttons are so close together. At some point someone's going to say something in a fit of self-righteousness, look at it, think better of it and take it out but leave both versions up.
Albatross wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 9:55 pm
I wish I knew more about the theory... I have no clue. People seem to enjoy my stuff but I'm oblivious to the science and mathematics of it.
This illustrates really well the "rules vs theory" question.
It would be difficult to be successful at cricket without knowing the rules, one would immediately fall foul of some "leg before tea" rule within the first half.
On the other hand the laws of physics are regularly upended as we observe at smaller and larger scales than Newton was technically able to.
Cricket is, of course, subject to rules disruption, there is still no clarity on hand ball that I can work out, but it is still defined by it's rules.
Physics is different, as new theories emerge so do novel methods of exploration and eventually old theories are shown to be incorrect, or at least incomplete.
But even early wo/man could use the "laws" of physics without codifying them, if only to beat each other with sticks.