<p>
</p>
<p>Do you honestly think physics would be where it is today if mathematics did not exist? For example, I’m studying physics III now, and many physical discoveries were the result of intense mathematics. Consider the discovery of the positron. The existence of the positron was predicted by manipulating the relativistic version of the Schrodinger equation( the Dirac equation). Do you really think scientists would have actively searched for a positron particle had it not been for an equation predicting it? Probably not considering that nobody had ever thought of such a concept until math predicted it. Would physicists be able to create a quantum mechanical model of the atom without mathematics? Where would quantum mechanical physics be without mathematics? </p>
<p>I’m sure you could develop qualitative observations of things like circuits, gravity, etc. Oh the apple falls from a tree every time it is released. Oh resistivity of a wire goes up with temperature. But would physics like that really be of any use without mathematics? In order for physics to be a precise science it obviously needs mathematics. Physics would not be where it is today without mathematics. </p>
<p>Maybe very basic qualitative physics (i.e. every time I release an apple it hits the ground) can exist without math, but physics as we know it today cannot exist or advance without math. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If by empirical, you mean experimental, then math is obviously not empirical, but that clearly does not make it less credible in any way.</p>