Talk:List of inequalities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder if a distinction should be made between mathematical inequalities like the triangle inequality and inequalities arising from the study of physics like Heisenberg's inequality? --Noosfractal 04:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. The distinction doesn't rest on anything substantial. Charles Matthews 06:50, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

One distinction that seems important to me is that physics inequalities can't be used to prove theorems in, for example, pure mathematics, whereas many mathematical inequalities are useful in physics. To me, Michael's confusion provides evidence that the distinction may be helpful. --noösfractal 03:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I think Heisenberg's inequality is a mathematical inequality, not an empirical observation. Michael Hardy 21:25, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

The inequality is certainly described using mathematical symbols, but the key constant in the inequality - Planck's constant - is empirically determined. --noösfractal 03:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

So the interesting point there is that there can be inequalities between quantities that are not dimensionless, I think. Charles Matthews 06:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

That is an interesting way of putting it. My perspective is that, in general, mathematical inequalities are independent of dimension (in the engineering sense), whereas physics necessarily references the physical world. Mathematics is an abstract intellectual construct that accidentally has applications to physics. There is a famous talk - The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences - by Wigner that explains it better than I can. --noösfractal 07:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

"Heisenberg's inequality" is a redirect page. Maybe someone who knows the material should put an actual article there, that is NOT about physics, and mention its application to physics, with a link to the page to which it now redirects. Michael Hardy 17:58, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The german version of this list is grouped into categories and I find it's a good idea. Is there a reason not to group this list, too? --MPils 04:32, 10 September August 2005 (MET)