> You care about physics. No, that's not what I meant. I am a computer engineer not a structural one. When I talk about building, I mean code, and making sure

> You care about physics. No, that's not what I meant. I am a computer engineer not a structural one. When I talk about building, I mean code, and making sure it does what it's supposed to. Unless you count algorithms and their behavior to fall under the umbrella of physics, of course. Mathematics most certainly does help predict what the behavior of my code will be. It's really not about illumination, it's about taking monster shortcuts in my code because a solidly proved theorem allows me to. > the word describes what mathematicians do, I think you just described what you think mathematicians do. I do know a number of pure mathematicians who think of their trade rather differently, namely they are trying to build useful math. > it simply illuminates what is already there. Now, we're strictly entering the domain of faith-based thinking. Are things already there only to be discovered, or do we invent them? Does the tree make a noise when it falls in the forest when no one is there to hear it fall? Pick your religion.