I read this article which is on how Feynman thought of the difference between physics and mathematics.
Feynman's point is that physics is to understand nature while mathematics is to make their own world. But I'm quite confused with the word 'understanding'.
This answer points out that physics is not to identify the truth. I can connect with this statement. Physics is inductive research as such we don't have any given principle. We just make some artificial principles from observations for our convenience. And we will never know if the principles are the truth behind nature. Nature would not tell us the correct set of principles.
Therefore, we will never understand the nature. At best, we will only pretend to understand nature. What we actually understand is our own artificial theories, not nature. Physicist chooses its own set of axioms and researches the theorems which are allowed by axioms. In this sense, is physics any different from mathematics?
And coming back to the 'understanding', what do we mean when we say 'I understand the nature'? Is that understanding any different from the mathematician understanding his theorem?