Using Linear Algebra to discover unknown Forces

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of linear algebra and reinforcement learning to identify unknown forces in classical mechanics. Participants explore the feasibility of using mathematical models and machine learning techniques to derive forces that are either conceptually known but unmeasured or entirely unknown in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that solving force equations involves finding a solvable system of equations that accounts for all existing forces and proposes using reinforcement learning to discover unknown forces.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of "unknown forces," arguing that if all existing forces are accounted for, there would be no unknowns left. They clarify that if unknown forces refer to those conceptually known but unmeasured, such as in control systems, then the approach may have merit.
  • There is a mention of using Kalman filtering as an example of identifying unmeasured forces based on deviations from expected models.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the simplicity of the proposed method for discovering entirely unknown forces, suggesting that modern physics requires more complex mathematics and modeling.
  • A different approach is proposed, involving training a neural network on a large dataset of projectile motion to reproduce classical mechanics answers, with an emphasis on understanding the model's reasoning.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for overconfidence in a single solution derived from the dataset, highlighting the possibility of multiple valid solutions.
  • A metaphor is used to illustrate the risks of not marking one's path in a search for solutions, suggesting that one might miss other valid peaks of understanding if not careful.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and complexity of using linear algebra and reinforcement learning to discover unknown forces. There is no consensus on the validity of the proposed methods, and multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the proposed methods, including assumptions about the completeness of existing force models and the potential for multiple solutions to arise from the dataset. The discussion highlights the complexity of modeling in physics without resolving these issues.

giodude
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
In classical mechanics, it seems like solving force equations are a question of finding a solvable system of equations that accounts for all existing forces and masses in question. Therefore, I'm curious if this can be mixed with reinforcement learning to create a game and reward function through which a model can derive any remaining or unknown forces. The reward function that I believe would be useful is to have the model find a set of systems in the form of square, invertible matrices and then use those systems to enact the state change from state 1 of the physical system to the recorded state 2 of the physical system and find which best approximates it, until approaching some desired confidence interval. I'm new to physics so this is a half baked approach but I'm curious to get feedback and maybe spark a discussion about what the benefits and challenges of this approach may be!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you account for all existing forces, there won't be any unknown forces left to determine.
Sorry, kind of nitpicking there.

If by unknown forces you mean conceptually known to physics but unmeasured, then yes. This happens all the time in control systems, for example. Like how an airplane knows what the wind speed is based on the perturbations in it's navigation models. Kalman filtering is another good example, where future noise can be reduced in a system by identifying how the signal has been deviating from the expected model.

If you mean discover a force previously unknown to physicists, then this is way too simplistic compared to the sort of math and modelling that modern physicists do. However, the general concept is correct. Look for things that don't fit the model. For example, this is how we know there is something we call "dark matter" and "dark energy". Your game may come up with some description of what doesn't fit. The problem then is explaining it. There is no guarantee that what you get is correct, it would just be a description of the errors or perhaps a new model system with no ontological justification.
 
One could take a large enough dataset of properly constructed measurements of, say, projectile motion, and train a neural network that would then reproduce the correct (enough) classical mechanics answers to problems, the issue would be understanding how the model arrives at answers
 
giodude said:
The reward function that I believe would be useful is to have the model find a set of systems in the form of square, invertible matrices and then use those systems to enact the state change from state 1 of the physical system to the recorded state 2 of the physical system and find which best approximates it, until approaching some desired confidence interval.
There may be multiple solutions to the dataset. You could not know that, so would be overconfident in the one simple solution that was found.

Imagine you land on the shore of a mountainous island. Your strategy is to walk uphill until you get to the top of the mountain. It is dark when you get there, so you build a survey marker, then walk back down the mountain.

If you had reached the summit in daylight, you might have seen several other peaks higher than the one you were on.

If you marked your track on the way up, you could return to the same landing point. If you did not mark the track, you could end up on some other beach, or precipice.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveE

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K