Re: [APML] Re: Science in Astrophotos?

[stephen pitt <lthuedk@pe.net>]

When I worked with biomedical rendering I was necessarily combining the
two disciplines.  To create experimental elegance is as right
hemispherical as any abstract vision an artist could conjure.  Both
require that logical projections win out.   Stephen

Thor Olson wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerry Lodriguss [mailto:jml@astropix.com]
> > If scientists are so different than artists, why are the
> > physicists so hung
> > up on the "beauty" of a theory?
>
> Does anyone else find it interesting that science and art
> are so tightly coupled?  It's my opinion that the best scientists
> and the best artists have in common a strong streak of
> creativity.  You don't explain Nature without the creative
> inspiration that interprets our observations.  You don't
> impact the human spirit without the creative inspiration
> to affect our senses.
>
> Thor Olson
> EFI-Minnesota                 email: mailto:thor.olson@efi.com
> web-res astrophotos at:       http://home.att.net/~nightscapes
>
>    "Man has ten, computers have two, Nature has e fingers."
>




--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>