Live data from Hacker News

A 9-line summary of textbook physics

motionmountain.net

131–140 of 179 posts

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#131

> Lines 1, 2 and 3, together, uniquely determine special and general relativity, cosmology, the Hilbert Lagrangian and Einstein's field equations, as told here. This is a huge exaggeration. For example 1 says "W=∫L" but L is never defined. The definition of L hides a lot of details, in particular that each point of the universe is equivalent, so there is translation invariance that using the Noether's theorem implies…

Oof. I don’t see how you recover any of thermodynamics. S ≥ k is a really odd axiom to start with. It certainly doesn’t superficially imply the second law. It’s also rather at odds with the usual statistical formulation in which the entropy of a system in its unique ground state (or simply a system without meaningful microscopic states) is zero. Imagine trying to describe the behavior of a single (idealized) particle in a box using this law — you would get very confused very quickly.

For non-physicists: you can model a gas as a bunch of almost entirely non-interacting particles in a box. You can assume that there is some way for them to exchange energy, but you don’t need any details at all of how that works. With some care (and IMO a really fascinating series of arguments) you can derive the ideal gas law and a whole lot of useful thermodynamics. As a first hack at reducing it to one sentence, I might try “at equilibrium, each unit of phase space (or each discrete microstate in a discrete system) is equally likely.”

(I personally find statistical mechanics much more intuitive than classical thermodynamics. I have always felt like E, H, F, and G are mathematically correct quantities that come from manipulating partial derivatives but that they mostly lack intuitive value. The quality of the average thermodynamics textbook doesn’t help.)

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#132
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just straight wrong. There is no computer in the world that can predict the outcome of, say, a drug trial from these equations. If your “science” requires an impossible computer to work then it’s not science it’s faith.

An impossible computer is different from a computer that humankind can not yet build. If our universe is a simulation, then some entity has already proven you wrong. If our universe isn't a simulation, our limited resources prevent us from running (detailed) universe-scale simulations. I'd say that we will eventually be able to simulate a drug interaction from these rules (it's the interaction between these rules tha…

Those are all reasonable beliefs, but still fall in the category of “faith”.

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#133
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just straight wrong. There is no computer in the world that can predict the outcome of, say, a drug trial from these equations. If your “science” requires an impossible computer to work then it’s not science it’s faith.

You are saying that we don't have a computer fast enough to simulate a drug trial, but you are not actually disagreeing with the parent.

No, I’m saying no computer will ever simulate it with only those equations. Higher level equations are needed which cannot be derived from the given ones, they can only be discovered through additional science.

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#134
post #35

Why do the first chapters of all physics textbook ONLY talk about Greek philosophers and scientists and NEVER talk about contribution to Science from eastern civilization like India and China ? These civilizations have a very rich heritage and astounding contribution to many underlying scientific philosophies. Yet generation after generation of writers ignore them and it is sad to see that being true even today. It i…

Off the top of my head, I can name three things from either China or India that are science-related: the positional numbering system (and zero), the Chinese remainder theorem, and gunpowder. What am I missing that's very important yet rarely mentioned?

India: quite a bit of astronomy and geometry. Also logic, philosophy and linguistics if you want to include them in the science list.

China: chemistry and metallurgy.

Indian science took a weird turn towards metaphysics and mystical stuff once the priests started playing a fundamental role in education.

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the way these are phrased do a better job expressing the "vibe", for lack of a better word, of our current understanding. That the particles and constants are declared by fiat, with behavior constrained by simpler laws, is an understanding I didn't come to until I took a QFT course. The physicist's God is as concerned with forbidding seemingly pointless things as the biologist's God is with beetles.

It is interesting that we humans have so much difficulty breaking away from anthropomorphizing.

And yet the vibe persists! Presumably it's due to low-level patterns you subconsciously pick up on, but much of the much-discussed physicist-intuition comes from knowing how the universe "likes" do do things. There's a similar thing in math, with many of the greats having just a few tricks they used over and over to great effect in any number of fields. I guess we're used to dealing with people, so the pattern is expressed as a preference (which does double duty encoding that it's not an absolute law).

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#136
post #124

The author is a well-known crank. See post #10 here, for instance: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/strand-model-published... Proceed with caution.

Indeed, the author's 2000-page online textbook, heavily promoted on the internet, is a classic trap for unwary students. It looks alright at first: volume I is light on math, but full of neat examples. But it's full of intuitively plausible but slightly wrong statements which fall apart in more general situations, reflecting the author's lack of technical expertise. This problem steadily gets worse: volume IV is an o…

What are the standard textbooks? Could I just look at the curriculum of any physics program of a respected school and go from there?

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#137
post #87

Can somebody with knowledge in biology and/or physics take a look at (one of) his book and comment if it's decent as in if the science is solid? I browsed https://www.motionmountain.net/motionmountain-volume5.pdf and I'm intrigued (there are no reviews in Amazon).

The earlier ones aren't terrible, but yeah they get real bad real fast. There are lot's of good introductory resources from people that know what they're talking about.

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#138
post #124

The author is a well-known crank. See post #10 here, for instance: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/strand-model-published... Proceed with caution.

Indeed, the author's 2000-page online textbook, heavily promoted on the internet, is a classic trap for unwary students. It looks alright at first: volume I is light on math, but full of neat examples. But it's full of intuitively plausible but slightly wrong statements which fall apart in more general situations, reflecting the author's lack of technical expertise. This problem steadily gets worse: volume IV is an o…

> the standard textbooks are excellent

A caveat. Some years ago, at a first-tier university, some physicists and mathematicians were munching. A physics professor described how days earlier he thought he had found a case of a well-respected intro physics textbook saying something wrong. But, after some hours and days of thought, he realized the textbook was very carefully worded so as to not be incorrect. Yay. Most everyone smiled and agreed it was an excellent textbook.

A bit later, there was a quiet out-of-band question: So... if you're already an expert on the topic, and do a close read, after thinking about it for days, you will escape being misled... and this is a win??

There's an old physics education research joke: If you think your lectures are working, your assessment also isn't. I've found that to apply to much science education content as well.

Re: A 9-line summary of textbook physics

#140
post #93

None of us can discount the possibility that the universe was fine tuned with a specific set of seed parameters which yields a specific trajectory including all of the narrative elements of one person or everyone’s lives. Most likely the big narrative payoff is somebody winning the claw game for once at the local sports bar. But which of us will it be for?

When Sabine Hossenfelder wins from the toy crane, maybe I'll take superdeterminism seriously.
Post reply on HN