I got an email

This was n-th time that while being right in the process of posting, my work was not saved, but got automatically wiped out. I will write as much as I can, from my recollection. (Invariably, such things begin to happen when the India-USA Nuclear Deal or some other issue of international importance reaches a critical phase. It is funny that in no such time do I get job---even if the Indians in the billionnaires lists, including Ambanis (Hindu) and Premji (Muslim) keep multiplying their accumulated money. (Hope that at least some of the bad attention that I always get at such times now goes their way, too!))

Anyway, let me recover as much of my thoughts as possible.

I got one email (see the attachment) in this my Inbox yesterday. The user was making a reference to my iMechanica postings, and hence, it is relevant to bring the matter out here.

I decided to share it out of two reasons

(i) As far as possible, people should write about such issues directly to iMechanica---not use my email for the purpose.

Obviously, this guy is a spurious one---his "from" name, the phrases in his email ID, and what he introduces himself as, do not match. He has left no signature, no affiliation, no way to contact him, no information about his superiors and so on.

But that is only one part of the story. There is another, far more important issue, though.

Giving him the most benefit of doubt, all that this guy seems to be posing is just a side issue in the detailed mathematics of hyperelasticity or so---not any fundamental, as he claims. I did try to read through his jumble, but failed to get anything when it came to the matrix equations. See if you can make anything out better. But it was the former aspect that I truly care about, and so, it leads us to the point (ii) below.

(ii) This guy obviously also is making a mistake to the effect that every tricky question (esp. concerning detailed mathematical manipulation) necessarily is a fundamental (esp. of physics or of engineering).

In fact, this is a very wide-spread mistake. To believe that every poser, every tricky question, esp. of mathematical nature, that any mind can cook up in any way, must have something to do with the fundamentals (esp. of physics).

But is it so?

In answer: PLAIN WRONG!

For that matter, not just sidey posers, but even a tough proper question does not always have to probe fundamentals.

A fundamental is not just a corner-stone. It is the very foundation upon which the whole building of higher, more abstract truths in a given area of knowledge depend. A fundamental truth is that on which all (or most number of) other truths depend.

It was this that I wanted to clarify. Hence this posting.