Thank you for your interesting considerations (as usual). It took some time to me to respond because in this period I am very busy with teaching.

I mostly agree with what you say about the equivalence sign "=". On the other hand, I must admit that in certain cases (like this) I suspect that this is not a mere equivalence in terms of numbers. Of course, I admit that my position about that has no scientific grounds, so I will not elaborate on that. I strongly believe that not all of out thoughts must be solidly fixed on scientific arguments. There is room for sensations and irrational thinking that eventually may (or may not) lead to some scientific output, indeed.

I much believe in a sentence I have heard from various colleagues according to which "too much rigor could soon lead to rigor mortis" :-)

Please do not take that as a critique to you. It is a joke. I see that you are very precise and rigorous, but that is certainly preventing you to reach interesting conclusions. On the contrary, I believe that we need both approaches: one, not very rigorous as mine, to grasp the meaning of something, and a more formal, deep reasoning like yours to make such a grasp quite solid.

As usual, then, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. They, for sure, will be benefit and may also lead to a more precise interpretation of scientific findings.

Professor of Physics at Sapienza Università di Roma. Member of the CMS and PADME collaborations. Arduino advocate and phyphox ambassador.

Professor of Physics at Sapienza Università di Roma. Member of the CMS and PADME collaborations. Arduino advocate and phyphox ambassador.