[AR] Re: Testing Scaling Law
- From: Ed LeBouthillier <codemonky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 11:35:14 -0700
On Sat, 2016-11-12 at 12:52 -0500, Norman Yarvin wrote:
Or you don't; you rely on experience instead. [...] On the other
hand, if in the same circumstances you think that you must first make
a model, you'll make one and it'll likely be
wrong.
The whole point of models is to collect the "wisdom of the ages," to
try to facilitate the decision making of those who don't have the
experiences. That way, not everyone has to reinvent everything and fail
as many times as those who came before them.
Yes, models are simplistic, and often wrong. We know that even
Newtonian Physics is wrong on the atomic scale, but at the aggregate
scale, it's pretty darn good up until relativistic effects ease in.
Despite its failings, the models described by Newtonian physics are
immensely useful. They almost completely describe rocket theory as it
is used today. In the same way, other simplistic models can be quite
useful if you understand their limitations.
Other related posts:
