1 1
wmw999

Science vs debate

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, riggerrob said:

I freely admit to understanding very little about quantum physics.

I have a pretty good grasp of Newtonian physics.

I have also read many articles about quantum physics, but when quantum physics clash with Newtonian physics, I get confused.

Perhaps the problem is that I am a visual learner and have seen very few diagrams of quantum physics that I can grasp at a glance.

Please note that I am not dismissing quantum physics. I would like to better understand quantum physics, but am currently baffled.

I have EXACTLY the same issue. 

Newtonian physics is something that we can inherently relate to because the physicality of it is something we're exposed to every day. Even if we don't have specialized knowlege to understand esoteric details the system generally FEELS right based on a reference that we're familiar with - our normal lives.

But I think quantum mechanics isn't like that. It REQUIRES a specialized language (mathematics) to describe and to create a reference framework in order to penetrate even just a little into the subject. We don't accidentally pick up any gross concepts in our everyday lives that apply to it in the same way that we do to Newtonian motion.

 

I think this is a good example of the broader issue - being sceptical about something that we don't understand despite others who have a much deeper knowlege giving us information of why we shouldn't be.

Personally, I think being skeptical of something I DO understand and have a reasoned argument for that skeptisim is a more robust way to shape my opinions. For something like quantum mechanics I have to trust people who understand the detail far better than me (while still understanding that it's a second hand position).

 

I think this is particularly a problem with the vaccinations because of the pop-science as it is explained by the media. Invariably all of these sources give just enough basic knoledge to make people feel like experts, despite not having the background to be able to accurately apply or extrapolate data. Dunning-Kruger absolutely applies here.

0276D89E-23FF-4B1F-9983-24114435811E.png

Edited by yoink
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kallend said:

In the interests of transparency I should mention that I taught quantum mechanics for some 30 years before i retired.

I have spent some time trying to delve into simplified explanations of the subject. I lack the math training to go deep into it. The thing that stands out to me after spending time on it is simply that the more that is discovered and proven in the particle accelerators the more unanswered questions pile up. It is fascinating to contemplate the particles and how they relate to each other. But what most people do not understand is that the forces involved are not understood at all. The mysteries just go on and on, probably to infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ryoder said:

I've heard it's turtles, all the way down!

Strings, it's all about the strings man. Kallend wasted all those years teaching the standard model. On the God scale it is not even kindergarten, more like pre-school. We are stumbling around in the dark, but at least we are up and moving around!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Strings, it's all about the strings man. Kallend wasted all those years teaching the standard model. On the God scale it is not even kindergarten, more like pre-school. We are stumbling around in the dark, but at least we are up and moving around!

Strings not relevant to solid state quantum mechanics which is (was)  my discipline.

Not sure they're relevant to anything at all.  Turtles have about as much evidence, maybe more.  I've seen turtles while diving.

Edited by kallend
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kallend said:

Strings not relevant to solid state quantum mechanics which is (was)  my discipline.

Not sure they're relevant to anything at all.  Turtles have about as much evidence, maybe more.  I've seen turtles while diving.

Years ago I was watching a documentary about Quantum Mechanics, and when the topic of string theory came up, a physicist they were interviewing made a comment like:

"At this point, until someone finds a way to conduct an experiment to prove or disprove it, string theory is indistinguishable from a religion."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ryoder said:

"At this point, until someone finds a way to conduct an experiment to prove or disprove it, string theory is indistinguishable from a religion."

There have been several "joke" scifi stories about that.  One was a guy who was trying to get his PhD, but they kept discovering new particles that required him to revise his thesis.  Finally his adviser recommended he change to religious studies, and they gave him his degree right away.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1