Understanding the frontier of physics?

[Fra]

I was thinking 'another' "what" the initial question (what does this imply?) implies----:

Do you (you all) think any, most, the greatest of discoveries are made through math (equations), or work with particles (experimental work), or?

I don't see why it has to be separated. I like to think two things are "obvious".

a) The first is that real input (observations, experiments) is a major raw material that feeds our increase in knowledge.

b) But we also need to make do theoretical work to refine our questions, and find a systematic and efficient way to interpret the input. I think if this as a general kind of "self observation". Theorizing beeing a kind of self observation, or getting in equilibrium with yourself.

When taken together input, observations and experiments can also be seen as "feedback".

If we consider ourselves as lifeforms, then both points above are necessary for success.

If we are to make a educated guess, as to what the relative frequency of observation of a particular even is, that simply means coming up with a number. And that leads us to math. If there was not math, we would have to invent it, just like mankind did once upon a time. But they did it for a reason, not just for the fun of it - or at least that's what I like to think it was before my time . But as our knowledge incrases, so does the complexity of math.

I don't like to see that there really is a contradiction or problem between theory and experiment, as they are both important. Currently I feel that the theory of physics is such a logical "mess" that I've got a feeling that's where the next step will be taken, but that's just my guess.

/Fredrik

 

[chrisina]

I didn't really understand the question, that's why I voted for 1.

I would propose to open another thread / poll, just don't know if it fits here or in "philosophy" :

Why is it that so far, mathematics have worked to explain the laws of nature ?

here are some suggestions for the poll answers :

1) because mankind developped mathematics looking at nature (eg counted apples in a basket, divided apple tarts into parts, apples falling from a tree, etc...)

2) because the one who created the universe was a mathematician

3) because we are lucky

4) none of the above

?

What do you guys think ? Shall we open this poll ? In this subforum ?

Thanks

 

[Demystifier]

Yes, that would be an interesting poll. Open it!

 

[jostpuur]

I voted "particle physics" because math is big, the laws that govern the universe are small. I think most of the problem with modern physics is that too much mathematics has been thrown at it.

I think the problems have their source in the fact that physicists don't usually know what they are doing with mathematics. When a physicist encounters something difficult that he doesn't understand, instead of improving himself, he distorts the mathematics until it has become easy enough for him.

I would be happy, if the development of theoretical physics in the future started to become more and more a job of mathematicians. Not because I wanted the science to go this way, but because this way I would be right with my opinions.

 

[Fra]

Yes, poll on. My opinion will be (1).

Not but be picky, but I'm not sure I agree mathematics "explains the laws of nature". Describes sounds better than explains to me?

/Fredrik

 

[pivoxa15]

I think the problems have their source in the fact that physicists don't usually know what they are doing with mathematics. When a physicist encounters something difficult that he doesn't understand, instead of improving himself, he distorts the mathematics until it has become easy enough for him.

I would be happy, if the development of theoretical physics in the future started to become more and more a job of mathematicians. Not because I wanted the science to go this way, but because this way I would be right with my opinions.

Agree with the first paragraph. Its not just a problem for academics but also undergrad students. A lot of difficulties in physics seem to be not understanding the maths. The students who ace maths usually are good at the upper level theoretical physics.