What field deals with the following fundamental questions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Avichal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Fundamental
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationships between various scientific fields, particularly physics, chemistry, and mathematics, and their approaches to understanding the universe. Participants explore the idea of whether there is a field that encompasses these interconnections and addresses fundamental questions about the nature of reality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that physics is the most fundamental understanding of the universe, suggesting that all scientific fields could theoretically be explained by its laws.
  • Others argue that chemistry can be viewed as applied physics, but due to the complexity of interactions, it requires a different approach that may not rely solely on physics.
  • A participant mentions that mathematics serves as a language for understanding the universe, though it is ultimately a human abstraction.
  • There is a discussion about the arbitrary distinction between physics and chemistry, with some noting fields like nuclear chemistry, chemical physics, and physical chemistry that bridge the two disciplines.
  • One participant humorously references the number 42, suggesting it may have significance in the context of understanding the universe.
  • Another participant raises the idea that many physicists may adopt a reductionist view of science, questioning the acceptance of emergent phenomena as part of scientific understanding.
  • There is a debate about the validity of fields with "science" in their names, with some participants expressing skepticism about their scientific rigor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the relationships between physics, chemistry, and mathematics, with no consensus reached on the nature of these connections or the validity of reductionist versus emergent perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions of fields and concepts, and there are unresolved assumptions regarding the nature of scientific inquiry and the classification of disciplines.

Avichal
Messages
294
Reaction score
0
Physics deals with finding out the basic rules by which the universe works. For me, physics is the most fundamental understanding of the universe. So theoretically, everything could be explained by the laws of physics. Is there any field that deals with the idea?

Similarly, chemistry is figuring out the rules by which matter around us behaves. I see chemistry as applied physics. Laws of chemistry could be explained by physics. But since there is too many things going on, we can't really explain it using laws of physics. So we don't approach studying chemistry by studying physics but we take a different approach.
Which field deals with such ideas i.e. chemistry is applied physics, approach taken to study it etc.

Similarly, there are other fundamental questions like following:-
- Mathematics could be the language of universe i.e. maybe everything could be expressed as a number
- Everything is built layer upon layer. Atoms, molecules are made up of more fundamental particles. Matter is made of atoms, molecules etc. Basically, physics -> chemistry -> biology -> psychology etc.

I know these all are just ideas and not concrete statements but is there any field that studies this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Avichal said:
But since there is too many things going on, we can't really explain it using laws of physics. So we don't approach studying chemistry by studying physics but we take a different approach.

What approach is that? At the end of the day everything comes down to mathematical physics. It's as simple as that. It comes down to especially satisfying "action/Lagrangian" and gauge symmetry laws in your mathematical modelling, as far as I've learned. Making sure all the laws of your model are frame invariant.
 
Avichal said:
Physics deals with finding out the basic rules by which the universe works. For me, physics is the most fundamental understanding of the universe. So theoretically, everything could be explained by the laws of physics. Is there any field that deals with the idea?
The broad of science attempts to study/observe the universe/Nature and answer the questions concerning its nature and behavior. Mathematics is a human abstraction based on our desire to quantify, i.e., count and measure, things.

The distinction between physics and chemistry is arbitrary, since they are different perspectives on the study of the nature of things. Certainly chemistry doesn't necessarily delve into the particle physics, but there is a field of nuclear chemistry, which deals with the fact that elements exist as isotopes. There are fields of chemical physics and physical chemistry, which have some commonality with condensed matter physics.

The universe/Nature is what it is and does what it does, and the challenge for us is to figure it out.

The universe/Nature cannot be quantified by a single number, although 42 may be one possibility.
 
Astronuc said:
although 42 may be one possibility

I know you jest, but trust me, 42 is going to pop up somewhere, and when it does, it's going to be BIG
 
Obligatory XKCD comic:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png
On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation.
http://xkcd.com/435/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Buzz Bloom and Greg Bernhardt
Ygggdrasil said:
Obligatory XKCD comic:
Hi Ygggdrasil:

I take your post as (mostly?) humorous, but I think many physicists may take it as gospel, and may see science as a whole as entirely reductionist. To what extent are emergent (non-reductionist) phenomena scienifically accepted as part of "the world".

A "helpful" metaphor would be (1) application software "science" is applied (2) system software "science", system software "science" is applied (3) firmware "science", and firmware "science is (4) applied hardware "science".

Regards,
Buzz
 
Buzz Bloom said:
Hi Ygggdrasil:

I take your post as (mostly?) humorous, but I think many physicists may take it as gospel, and may see science as a whole as entirely reductionist. To what extent are emergent (non-reductionist) phenomena scienifically accepted as part of "the world".

A "helpful" metaphor would be (1) application software "science" is applied (2) system software "science", system software "science" is applied (3) firmware "science", and firmware "science is (4) applied hardware "science".

Regards,
Buzz

If a field has "science" in its name, then it isn't science.
 
Hornbein said:
If a field has "science" in its name, then it isn't science.
Hi Hornbein:

Thanks for your post. You have an interesting heuristic for determining what isn't science. Or perhaps you inadvertantly omitited the wink emoticon: ;)
computer science
medical science
neuroscience
bioscience
life science
social science
political science​

Regards,
Buzz
 

Similar threads

Programs Where did all the “fundamentals-deepening” master’s programs go?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Programs Help me decide: physics or chemistry?
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
10K
What's the best major between Physics & Chemistry for entering MS in Nuclear Engineering?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Undergrad Fundamental - Magnetic fields generated by moving electrons
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
Implementing “Ab initio” approach in molecular mechanics method
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Changing or breaking the most fundamental laws and symmetries?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Philosophy of Science: Discussing Maths, Physics, Mind, & AI
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Is it possible to make science as marketable as Engineering?
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
Undergrad What do applied mathematicians deal with?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Are fields' reality only a relative one?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
883