5 ms·

So with the laws, how do we know when we're done? For example, we had Newtonian Mechanics and that looked good for a couple of centuries, but then it turned ou

So with the laws, how do we know when we're done? For example, we had Newtonian Mechanics and that looked good for a couple of centuries, but then it turned out that it was too simple and we needed to add more laws.

Bjartr 8y ago
We're so far away from being done it's not an applicable question just yet, but it may not be possible to know if there's something outside our ability to comprehend or perceive, even with sophisticated measuring tools. We would have to settle for merely being able to explain every single phenomena in the observable universe at every scale.
- graycat 8y ago
  Look up and see a recent essay by the head of the Princeton Institute of Advanced Study where, for my rough summary from rough memory, he explained that physics can have lots of models that all fit all the data the same. So, it can be tough to find the one correct model, the one book of physics, the one way the universe runs, etc. Then see a recent essay at Quanta Magazine that explains that physics has long looked to some largely esthetic concerns especially about symmetry to pick and choose among alternate theoretical explanations -- again my rough summary from my rough memory.
  - fovc 8y ago
    I found an essay by the head of the IAS, published in Quanta Magazine. Could the two essays be one and the same? https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-theres-only-the-landscape-20180604/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-...
    - graycat 8y ago
      The article on beauty, e.g., symmetry, as a way to select candidate theories in physics I read was Sabine Hossenfelder, Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray at https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/sabine-hossenfelder/lost-in-math/9780465094264/ https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/sabine-hossenfelder/lost-i... and is an excerpt from her book of the same name. I was led to that excerpt by page https://www.quantamagazine.org/authors/sabine-hossenfelder/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/authors/sabine-hossenfelder/ from page Sabine Hossenfelder, "The End of Theoretical Physics As We Know It", August 27, 2018. at https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-end-of-theoretical-physics-as-we-know-it-20180827/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-end-of-theoretical-physic...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
castis 8y ago
> how do we know when we're done? It's not currently (maybe ever?) possible to know when you're 'done' with an experimental science. With newtonian mechanics, we didn't know we needed something better until we did.
ValleyOfTheMtns 8y ago
This makes me think of Plato's Cave.
ecnahc515 8y ago
Rephrasing other people's responses: I think it's sorta like the halting problem. If we could solve "how do we know if we've discovered all laws of the universe", then we would likely already require the knowledge of all the laws already, since it likely depends on everything else.
mehrdadn 8y ago
I'd say you're done whenever you've been able to predict/explain all phenomena that you believe you should be able to predict/explain using your models? Not sure if that answers your question, but if not then I'm not sure I understand what aspect of this you're confused about.

Bjartr 8y ago

We're so far away from being done it's not an applicable question just yet, but it may not be possible to know if there's something outside our ability to comprehend or perceive, even with sophisticated measuring tools. We would have to settle for merely being able to explain every single phenomena in the observable universe at every scale.

graycat 8y ago
Look up and see a recent essay by the head of the Princeton Institute of Advanced Study where, for my rough summary from rough memory, he explained that physics can have lots of models that all fit all the data the same. So, it can be tough to find the one correct model, the one book of physics, the one way the universe runs, etc. Then see a recent essay at Quanta Magazine that explains that physics has long looked to some largely esthetic concerns especially about symmetry to pick and choose among alternate theoretical explanations -- again my rough summary from my rough memory.
- fovc 8y ago
  I found an essay by the head of the IAS, published in Quanta Magazine. Could the two essays be one and the same? https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-theres-only-the-landscape-20180604/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/there-are-no-laws-of-physics-...
  - graycat 8y ago
    The article on beauty, e.g., symmetry, as a way to select candidate theories in physics I read was Sabine Hossenfelder, Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray at https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/sabine-hossenfelder/lost-in-math/9780465094264/ https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/sabine-hossenfelder/lost-i... and is an excerpt from her book of the same name. I was led to that excerpt by page https://www.quantamagazine.org/authors/sabine-hossenfelder/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/authors/sabine-hossenfelder/ from page Sabine Hossenfelder, "The End of Theoretical Physics As We Know It", August 27, 2018. at https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-end-of-theoretical-physics-as-we-know-it-20180827/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-end-of-theoretical-physic...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

castis 8y ago

> how do we know when we're done? It's not currently (maybe ever?) possible to know when you're 'done' with an experimental science. With newtonian mechanics, we didn't know we needed something better until we did.

ValleyOfTheMtns 8y ago

This makes me think of Plato's Cave.

ecnahc515 8y ago

Rephrasing other people's responses: I think it's sorta like the halting problem. If we could solve "how do we know if we've discovered all laws of the universe", then we would likely already require the knowledge of all the laws already, since it likely depends on everything else.

mehrdadn 8y ago

I'd say you're done whenever you've been able to predict/explain all phenomena that you believe you should be able to predict/explain using your models? Not sure if that answers your question, but if not then I'm not sure I understand what aspect of this you're confused about.