What are the most important open questions in classical physics?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 2K views
andresB
Messages
627
Reaction score
375
As the tittle say. I've been out of touch with many branch of non-quantum non-relativistic physics and I would like to know what people that work in these areas would say are the most important or interesting current trents of research in classical physics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Though I myself do not work in physics area I find complex systems interesting.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
HallsofIvy said:
Why does the toast always fall jelly side down?
I thought somebody had done some work on that. The conclusion, as I recall, was that in a higher gravitational field we'd be shorter (due to needing to pump blood to our heads) by exactly the same fraction as the increase in the gravitational couple and hence spin rate imparted to dropped toast. So they proposed that toast falling butter side down was likely a universal constant.
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: DennisN
HallsofIvy said:
Why does the toast always fall jelly side down?
Ibix said:
I thought somebody had done some work on that. The conclusion, as I recall, was that in a higher gravitational field we'd be shorter (due to needing to pump blood to our heads) by exactly the same fraction as the increase in the gravitational couple and hence spin rate imparted to dropped toast. So they proposed that toast falling butter side down was likely a universal constant.

Pleasantly surprised to find https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buttered_toast_phenomenon.
Among the references:

Bacon (2001). "A closer look at tumbling toast". American Journal of Physics. 69: 38–43.
https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1289213
https://space.umd.edu/dch/p405s04/AJP00038.pdf

R A J Matthews (1995) "Tumbling toast, Murphy's Law and the fundamental constants". Eur. J. Phys. 16 172
https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/16/4/005
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix and DennisN
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MathematicalPhysicist