12 ms·

She is not claiming that high energy physics is foundational. The foundations of physics are the main theories on top of which the whole edifice is built. In ph

She is not claiming that high energy physics is foundational. The foundations of physics are the main theories on top of which the whole edifice is built. In physics, these foundations include the Theory of Relativity and the Standard Model of Particle Physics. We know that the foundations are incomplete because the Standard Model cannot be combined with General Relativity, although there is overwhelming empirical evidence in favor of both. They also fail to predict Dark Energy and Dark Matter. So we know that there is something foundational we don't know. One of the hopes of finding out what this is is to gather more empirical data (also allowing one to put many hypothesis to the test along the way). On the side of the Standard Model, high particle physics provides the theoretical and experimental framework to gather more such empirical data, that being the purpose of the particle accelerators. The author is lamenting that these efforts did not produce the results we were hoping for, and that they did not lead to any breakthrough on the foundational mysteries. I do not quite agree with your foundations of Computer Science. For me, these are the theoretical constructs that give sense to everything else, for example Turing Machines and the main results on Turing Machines. Perhaps also Lambda Calculus, or at least combinatory logic and so on. Another example: in modern Biology, the concept of "imperfect replicator" is foundational. If you remove that piece, the whole edifice crumbles into stamp collecting.

xorand 8y ago
> in modern Biology, the concept of "imperfect replicator" is foundational Can you share some references to this concept? Google Scholar with "imperfect replicator" doesn't help me much. Thank you.
- TelmoMenezes 8y ago
  It's just a very succinct and abstract description of the modern synthesis of Darwinism and genetic theory. All organisms are self-replicating mechanisms, in the sense that they can generate a new organism that is built from the same DNA program (replicator) with mutations and possibly recombinations in the program (imperfect). The fact that the replications are imperfect is what allows for evolution to emerge. Together with survival-of-the-fittest mechanisms, this explains why life is so complex, why this complexity tends to increase with time, why there are so many species and so on. It is possible to understand many details of nature by building on this idea. Higher-order theories if you like: why do organisms from different species sometimes look so similar? Why do certain organisms, such as the peacocks, have features that seem so unpractical, etc. Without it, we would be left with just cataloging stuff, as we once were.
  - nn3 8y ago
    >Together with survival-of-the-fittest There are actually many more mechanism in evolution, such as genetic drift or geographic separation. You're merely focusing on one special aspect of evolution here. Biology in practice is a quite messy science. Fitting quote: Another curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understand it. I mean philosophers, social scientists, and so on. While in fact very few people understand it, actually as it stands, even as it stood when Darwin expressed it, and even less as we now may be able to understand it in biology (Jacques Monod)
    - TelmoMenezes 8y ago
      > There are actually many more mechanism in evolution, such as genetic drift or geographic separation. You're merely focusing on one special aspect of evolution here. No, it's not some ad-hoc aspect among many. Notice that I was trying to illustrate what it means to say that some theory is foundational in a field. It means that, if you remove it, the rest of the edifice falls apart. Imperfect self-replication and survival-of-the-fittest are foundational in that sense. You cannot make sense of concepts such as speciation through geographical separation, neutral mutations, theories about why genders exist, kin selection, eusociality, etc etc etc without those foundational pieces. What you say is a bit like saying that the Theory of Relativity is just one special aspect of theoretical physics: there's also planetary dynamics, for example. > Fitting quote: The danger with these types of quotes is that they tend to end up applying to oneself.

xorand 8y ago

> in modern Biology, the concept of "imperfect replicator" is foundational Can you share some references to this concept? Google Scholar with "imperfect replicator" doesn't help me much. Thank you.

TelmoMenezes 8y ago
It's just a very succinct and abstract description of the modern synthesis of Darwinism and genetic theory. All organisms are self-replicating mechanisms, in the sense that they can generate a new organism that is built from the same DNA program (replicator) with mutations and possibly recombinations in the program (imperfect). The fact that the replications are imperfect is what allows for evolution to emerge. Together with survival-of-the-fittest mechanisms, this explains why life is so complex, why this complexity tends to increase with time, why there are so many species and so on. It is possible to understand many details of nature by building on this idea. Higher-order theories if you like: why do organisms from different species sometimes look so similar? Why do certain organisms, such as the peacocks, have features that seem so unpractical, etc. Without it, we would be left with just cataloging stuff, as we once were.
- nn3 8y ago
  >Together with survival-of-the-fittest There are actually many more mechanism in evolution, such as genetic drift or geographic separation. You're merely focusing on one special aspect of evolution here. Biology in practice is a quite messy science. Fitting quote: Another curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understand it. I mean philosophers, social scientists, and so on. While in fact very few people understand it, actually as it stands, even as it stood when Darwin expressed it, and even less as we now may be able to understand it in biology (Jacques Monod)
  - TelmoMenezes 8y ago
    > There are actually many more mechanism in evolution, such as genetic drift or geographic separation. You're merely focusing on one special aspect of evolution here. No, it's not some ad-hoc aspect among many. Notice that I was trying to illustrate what it means to say that some theory is foundational in a field. It means that, if you remove it, the rest of the edifice falls apart. Imperfect self-replication and survival-of-the-fittest are foundational in that sense. You cannot make sense of concepts such as speciation through geographical separation, neutral mutations, theories about why genders exist, kin selection, eusociality, etc etc etc without those foundational pieces. What you say is a bit like saying that the Theory of Relativity is just one special aspect of theoretical physics: there's also planetary dynamics, for example. > Fitting quote: The danger with these types of quotes is that they tend to end up applying to oneself.