Can Physics Explain the Phenomenon of Love?

[curiousman]

Hi,

Can love be explained by physics?

I've been doing some research with no luck. I know there are a few books about however they treat the subject in a spiritual way with no science behind. Then, I've been reading some "theories" about sympathetic vibrations caused by love; oscillations which are excited indirectly by our driver (probably through elements which are not themselves highly resonant, and which will not to continue to resonate long after the source is turned off), and can continue to resonate after the source is turned off. In other words, falling in love by someone generates and keeps an internal reaction without the need of keeping contact with the source. Now, please don't ask me about the maths explanation because I have no clue.

Thanks,
curiousman

 

[fresh_42]

I'd start with the replacement of 'physical' by 'chemical'. There are a lot of chemical processes going on, and it's all body chemistry - although very complex.

 

[BillTre]

In order to explain love, you first need a good description of it and list of it properties that at least many would agree to.

Your explanation should also use well defined, commonly understood, scientific terms and concepts.
"our driver" and "the source" would need to be fleshed out.

Considering animal models (like dogs?) might be useful.

I would guess it involves memories and associated emotions.

 

[Mark44]

Then, I've been reading some "theories" about sympathetic vibrations caused by love; oscillations which are excited indirectly by our driver (probably through elements which are not themselves highly resonant, and which will not to continue to resonate long after the source is turned off), and can continue to resonate after the source is turned off.

This smacks of New Age mumbo-jumbo...

 

[symbolipoint]

Physics is the wrong field for something of Psychology. Your topic is of how people feel what they feel and why. Not for Physics; but Psychology, Biology, maybe Biochemistry(?). Anthropology maybe?

 

[eespino6]

I'd start with the replacement of 'physical' by 'chemical'. There are a lot of chemical processes going on, and it's all body chemistry - although very complex.

I can counter that by looking at love from a physical, neuroscientific, chemical, and biological perspective. Science says that love stems from serotonin, oxytocin, and dopamine, which adhere to laws of chemistry, biology, neuroscience, and physics. You can even argue that love can be explored even more complexly at a mathematical level.

 

[gleem]

Don't forget genetics and how one was nurtured.

 

[BWV]

Biology is just complicated chemistry and chemistry is physics so go for it. You can start by deriving human neurology from first principles, although to do so you probably would need a to first derive all human physiology down to the sub-cellular level as one can’t separate the brain from the rest of the body.

 

[MotherMayhem]

One could also argue the need to define what love you are specifically referring to.
Is it the reference to what would be described as one would feel as love between partners, a human and their pet or a parent and their child or children because these all could create different discussions in potential for connection and chemical here.

 

[PhysicsEnjoyer31415]

I do not understand the OP's post about vibrating and resonating elements due to love , it is not logical . However Love can be described as release of hormones and it ends here for the most part as it is just a chemical process in biology . Physics can describe the interaction of the hormones with electrostatics..? Or maybe thermodynamics ...but other than that love does not cause anything to resonate or whatever sounds like gibberish

If you are talking about resonating frequency of particles or the molecules , being in love will not affect any kind of resonant frequency/ natural frequency of the particle/compound given that the conditions remain same .

 

[BillTre]

Exactly what do you mean by "love".
Without adequately defining that, the rest is an undirected noise.

 

[PhysicsEnjoyer31415]

Exactly what do you mean by "love".
Without adequately defining that, the rest is an undirected noise.

Exactly...the OP is either spewing pseudoscience (most likely ) or saying something which has to be interpreted in a different way


Unless the OP makes it clear we cannot do anything ...

 

[Vanadium 50]

I do not understand the OP's post

The OP just tossed a stink bomb and left. 3-1/2 years ago.

 

[PhysicsEnjoyer31415]

The OP just tossed a stink bomb and left. 3-1/2 years ago.

Yep ...Its one of those moments . OP was like "I feel destructive and unscientific today" and proceeded to shellshock the entire general discussion 6 years ago

 

[phinds]

3-1/2 years ago.

3-1/2 years ago

Uh ... SIX years ago he made this post and then left.

 

[PhysicsEnjoyer31415]

Uh ... SIX years ago he made this post and then left.

OH.....we forgot it is not 2020 / 2021 anymore

 

[phinds]

OH.....we forgot it is not 2020 / 2021 anymore

Oh, Jeez, let's NOT go back to 2020.

 

[PhysicsEnjoyer31415]

Oh, Jeez, let's NOT go back to 2020.

I wish for the same

 

[BillTre]

The OP just tossed a stink bomb and left. 3-1/2 years ago.

How about just closing this thread.

 

[fresh_42]

How about just closing this thread.

Done. It's of questionable value anyway.