Physicists and Philosophers Debate the Boundaries of Science

Post by tmptmp » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 3:07 PM UTC

fengwick3 wrote: post #97

purpled_haze wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But yet, there isn't a crisis in physics at all since these theorists are so far removed from reality, I don't really care what they think. They don't really tell use anything useful or interesting so I tend to ignore them. Einstein was a theoretical physicist. Without his theories: * Japan might not have been defeated in WWII. * There might be more coal power plants, because there would be no nuclear power plants.…

I don't think you seem to understand the argument here. Einstein is a prime example of a theorist whose bold theories predicted verifiable results, such as the Einstein Cross. The problem with modern theorists, as the article and the parent comment articulated, is that string theories and whatnot often predict untestable and unverifiable results. This is not an attack on all physics theorists - rather, it's a critici…

Post by justifier » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 3:52 PM UTC

justifier wrote: post #25

Animats wrote: post #15

Physics used to be "hard science" - if it wasn't testable, it wasn't meaningful. Physicists used to look down on other sciences for that reason. This article shows how much worse things have become. Nobody can figure out a way to test string theory. In cosmology, you can only observe, not experiment. As the article points out, the big questions are out of reach for scaling reasons. Trying to fix the problem through w…

yeah, that's a picture of the implied surface of the electron cloud surrounding an atom's nucleus

    An ordinary microscope, which employs optical lenses, could view objects
    smaller than the wavelength of light. An electron microscope could view 
    smaller things with greater clarity than an optical microscope, but still
    could not clearly view individual atoms.
    
    So Binnig and Rohrer decided to build their own instrument – something new 
    that would be capable of seeing and manipulating atoms at the nanoscale level.
    To do that, they began experimenting with tunneling, a quantum phenomenon in 
    which atoms escape the surface of a solid to form a kind of cloud that hovers 
    above the surface; when another surface approaches, its atomic cloud overlaps 
    and an atomic exchange occurs.
    
    By maneuvering a sharp metal conducting tip over the surface of a sample at an
    extremely small distance, Binnig and Rohrer found that the amount of electrical
    current flowing between the tip and the surface could be measured. Variations in
    this current could provide information about the inner structure and the
    height-relief of the surface. And from this information, one could build a
    three-dimensional atomic-scale map of the sample’s surface.

Post by cabinpark » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:40 PM UTC

danharaj wrote: post #95

cabinpark wrote: post #84

I think high level theory is wandering aimlessly through a field blindfolded with little guidance or where to look. This is because our current theories are so good, we have no idea where to look. So it begins conjecturing and conjecturing. What it ends up with is nonsensical garbage that does little to advance physics. But yet, there isn't a crisis in physics at all since these theorists are so far removed from real…

Mathematical physics is important even if it doesn't produce theories that have direct relevance to current unexplained phenomena. String theory has been an enormous contribution to what we know of the mathematical structure of quantum field theory itself. These developments while not yet, if ever testable as the correct extension of the standard model contribute new mathematical methods, principles, and ideas that t…

Post by dmfdmf » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 7:09 PM UTC

IsaacL wrote: post #134

dmfdmf wrote: post #48

This crisis in Physics makes me happier than anyone can know. It signals the end of the dominance of Kantian philosophy in Physics. Mach's principle (Einstein's polestar), Popperian falsifiability, Cantor's paradise of infinity (as described by Hilbert) and all other derivatives of Kant are the dead-end of a false metaphysics and epistemology. We do indeed, live in interesting (or depending on your worldview, dangero…

I remember meeting you back in August on Hacker News! Since then I read P:WNI and ITOE on your recommendation, then worked my way through a huge stack of Objectivist non-fiction. I registered for OCON last week - even if you're getting downvoted for this comment your earlier HN comments have had an impact! This article also made me think of Rand, and I wish they had some awareness of Rand's epistemology. They do ment…

Post by manigandham » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 10:21 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #15

Physics used to be "hard science" - if it wasn't testable, it wasn't meaningful. Physicists used to look down on other sciences for that reason. This article shows how much worse things have become. Nobody can figure out a way to test string theory. In cosmology, you can only observe, not experiment. As the article points out, the big questions are out of reach for scaling reasons. Trying to fix the problem through w…