Please share your thoughts about any part (or all) of the following:

“Art, chance, and violence differ from nature and so aid in its definition, but a perhaps more significant opposite of the natural or the physical in our day is the mathematical. This opposition becomes important when differentiating natural science from mathematical knowledge as this is applied to nature. In mathematical physics, for example, the object of consideration is not the natural as such but rather the sensible or physical as compounded with the quantified or mathematical. It is for this reason that mathematical physics is called a mixed science. The middle terms or explanatory factors it employs are physico-mathematical, but the formality under which it demonstrates is mathematical and its conclusions are only terminatively physical. The mathematical physicist must measure motion or time in order to treat it; the philosopher of nature has the problem of defining motion or time regardless of how it is measured. Again, the results attained by the mathematical physicist require interpretation if one is to give a physical reason or explanation for the facts he knows in only their mathematical reasons. Such interpretation, it can be argued, is itself external to mathematical physics; it is properly the function of the science of nature, where the physical causes of natural things are sought. The mathematical physicist may himself take on this function, but it is noteworthy that difficult problems of interpretation are increasingly becoming the domain of the philosopher of science.” (*The Elements of Philosophy*, William A. Wallace; PART 1. // CHAPTER 3 NATURAL PHILOSOPHY // [Section] §17. NATURE // [paragraph] 7 // [page] 48).

With gratitude,

Otto