Timeline for Can the "physical argument" for the existence of a solution to Dirichlet's problem be made into an actual proof?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 29, 2009 at 23:21 | comment | added | George Lowther | This seems like a reasonable response to the question. Because it relates to a physical problem doesn't prove the result mathematically, or help to prove it, unless the physical situation can be handled with rigorous mathematics. The mathematical theory of Brownian motion does this (although it wasn't understood mathematically in the 19th century). | |
| Oct 28, 2009 at 23:46 | comment | added | Ilya Nikokoshev | I think he's specifically referring to "translate it into an actual proof", which should mean actual mathematical proof. | |
| Oct 28, 2009 at 19:40 | comment | added | Eric Wofsey | I would assume the question means, can you prove the Dirichlet problem has a solution by assuming that certain laws of physics are valid (and in particular, that a certain abstract mathematical model of them is well-defined and consistent)? | |
| Oct 28, 2009 at 19:15 | history | edited | engelbrekt | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
made a point clearer
|
| Oct 28, 2009 at 19:05 | history | answered | engelbrekt | CC BY-SA 2.5 |