Category talk:Mathematical Physics

How should we merge this with Definition:Physics and Definition:Classical Mechanics? I'd personally probably get rid of mathematical physics and put classical mechanics under physics under applied mathematics, but what do others think? --Cynic (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Not sure how it will pan out, yet. IMO though:
 * Applied mathematics would be the top level category.
 * Classical Mechanics is subcateg of Applied Mathematics. It contains stuff like the standard laws of motion and balancing of forces and so on.
 * Mathematical Physics is the grown-up stuff where entire fields of mathematics have grown out of physics problems, for example, Sturm-Liouville Theory, and the Navier-Stokes work. Subcategories as appropriate.
 * Physics contains the actual physical laws, e.g. F=ma (or its most basic interpretation, we'd probably have something like "force equals rate of change of momentum" to be as all-encompassing as possible), and the contents of the "Applied Mathematics" would be the mathematical consequences of these things. Also in here would be physical effects which can be derived from the mathematical manipulation of physical entities. So Physics as such should be in its own section.

I haven't got round to working on the applied maths stuff yet because I've got to go and dig out my old app maths texts which are at the bottom of the pile. --Prime.mover 22:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)