Topic about physics axioms, theory, laws etc..

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter user079622
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the nature of axioms in physics, contrasting them with mathematical axioms. Participants assert that physics relies on observations and experiments rather than unquestioned truths, emphasizing that theories are subject to revision based on new data. Key examples include the discovery of Newton's F=ma through experimentation and the constancy of the speed of light, which is also experimentally validated. The conversation highlights that while physics aims for accuracy, it is inherently provisional and open to change, unlike the absolute nature of mathematical truths.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian mechanics, specifically F=ma.
  • Familiarity with the principles of special relativity and the constancy of the speed of light.
  • Basic knowledge of scientific methodology, including the role of experiments in validating theories.
  • Conceptual grasp of the differences between axioms and postulates in scientific discourse.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the experimental basis of special relativity, focusing on key experiments that validate its principles.
  • Study the historical context of Newton's laws and the experiments that led to their formulation.
  • Explore the philosophical implications of scientific theories and their provisional nature in contrast to mathematical axioms.
  • Investigate the role of postulates in physics, particularly in theories like string theory and their acceptance in academic settings.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of scientific theories and their experimental validation.

  • #91
jbriggs444 said:
Since the rest frame of Westminster Abbey is rotating, that leaves some remaining troubles with simultaneity.
No, that's not true. Simultaneous events that occur in the same place remain simultaneous with respect to all reference frames, regardless of whether they are inertial or not or whether they rotate or not.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Jaime Rudas said:
No, that's not true. Simultaneous events that occur in the same place remain simultaneous with respect to all reference frames, regardless of whether they are inertial or not or whether they rotate or not.
We are not talking about events that occur in the same place. We are talking about an event occurring at Westminster Abbey (e.g. coronation) and a separate event occurring in Australia (the time there when the coronation is deemed to have taken place). Those two events are space-like separated.

We need a simultaneity convention for that. A rotating reference frame is a poor starting point for defining a simultaneity standard. A good choice would instead be an Earth-centered inertial frame.
 
Last edited:
  • #93
A few recent posts about clearly non-physical things have been deleted. Thank you to those who wrote good information to correct some misconceptions.

Please remember, the topic of this thread is about axioms in physics. Relativity discussions belong in the relativity forum.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby
  • #94
I think a point that may be relevant here is that Mathematics isn't bound by Physical reality, as the Banach-Tarski Paradox whereby we can turn a ball B with volume V into two such balls with volume V each , through (relatively straighforward -- Mathematically) transformations, shows ; something that cannot be implemented physically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby and fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
941
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K