Scientific Method- Part 3

SHANKARA WROTE:

<Doyou want to know its location 3 seconds from now?>>

Contrast this approach with the approach that I am talking about.Instead of analysing the motion of particle, u somehow transfer yourself into the particle. Its like u have got into the particle and moving along with
it.Would not your understanding of the motion of particle now would be better than what it was with the external analysis by scientific method? Can you not describe your motion at every single instant of time? When you are doing a scientific analysis, are you not taking snapshots at discrete intervals and then trying to construct a continuous picture out of it? At the first time, the difference is huge because the intervals are large. You refine the process by decreasing the inter-frame interval and come closer to a continuous motion at every attempt. However hard you may try u will never get a really continuous motion as you there is a fundamental conflict between the two objects (one is discrete and other continuous . To get a truly continuous frame, you need to have the inter-frame interval zero, which is not possible in scientific analysis.

Another point with the usage of mathematics for this approximation. Science in its attempt to make a discrete event as continuous as possible, introduces the concept of "dt" or 'delta t'. Science has not given a
scientific, mathematical definition of 'delta t'. The definition is of intuitive nature and to make it mathematical, have introduced the idea of limits. (tending to zero but not equal to zero.) Is it not a proof enough of the inadequacy of science to explain phenomena?

To give you a even better idea of what I am talking about, say Kislay is in motion. I capture all his movements for about one hour and apply scientific analysis on it. I have a wealth of information about Kislay's movement.
I know what was your velocity at a particular time period ( I still doubt, if science can provide me the information at a particular instant) and you will not be aware. Yet, I believe you can understand your motion in a much
better sense that I can I ever hope to do. You can, if you want, describe your motion at a particular instant of time while I cant.

Now coming to the SHM problem, what do I do if I want to know its motion both in space domain and time domain simultaneously? Can science answer it ? When I say I want to understand the phenomenon, I mean I should be able to visualize it without any need for external symbols or formulae. What I mean by understanding SHM, is I should be able to imagine myself as the pendulum and feel its to- fro motion as if I am the pendulum.

We both know that y(t)= A sin(w*t) is different from y(t) = A'cos(w'*t). When I say understanding it,I mean I should be able to able to identify that there is some difference between these two, without constructing their
equations.

Don't u think, we should have a website, that explains these physics concepts in an intuitive way. Can we define acceleration as something more than dv/dt?