> and therefore does not really provide understanding of the underlying process
What is “the underlying process”?
For example, Newton was able to model gravity quite successfully without ever being able to “understand the underlying process”. In fact, physics today still doesn’t have a good grasp on what gravity is. Yet we use the models and equations all the time
In a way, physics is also a collection of black boxes, perhaps just seemingly more elegant boxes
What is “the underlying process”?
For example, Newton was able to model gravity quite successfully without ever being able to “understand the underlying process”. In fact, physics today still doesn’t have a good grasp on what gravity is. Yet we use the models and equations all the time
In a way, physics is also a collection of black boxes, perhaps just seemingly more elegant boxes