5 ms·

science is great...love it....got a degree in it...but i never pretend that we are anything but children when it comes to understanding the universe...we got a

• bowsamic 4y ago
  I have a PhD in theoretical quantum optics, currently doing postdoc and moving to experimental stuff, and I have to agree. We don’t know how quantum mechanics works at a basic level, what is a measurement? Are wave functions real? Are we just ignorant or are things really inherently probabilistic? These (and others) are huge questions underpinning our basic reality, but we have only made very modest progress on them, if any. It’s not clear that we will ever know, there’s certainly not a clear path forward
  • spaetzleesser 4y ago
    A guy like Einstein or Newton comes along every few hundred years. I can’t even imagine what we will find out if we keep doing science for a few thousand years more.
    • PartiallyTyped 4y ago
      Plenty of people have come. Gödel was one, JVN was one, Terry Tao is likely one. But it's also worth remembering that some of the smartest people in our society are optimizing ad serving.
      • bowsamic 4y ago
        Physics and maths are both so specialised and large now that it’s not really possible to have such great minds now. Einstein had a good grasp on almost all physics of his time, Newton did for literally all of it for his time. It isn’t possible for any modern physicist to have a full grasp of even a single sub field
        • 8bitsrule 4y ago
          >Newton did for literally all of it for his time. Even Newton wasn't wary enough of prejudices that slowed useful insights. As a result: "Until the early 19th century, most scientists shared Isaac Newton's view that no small objects could exist in the interplanetary space - an assumption leaving no room for stones falling from the sky." [http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm]
        • PartiallyTyped 4y ago
          That's the problem with science.. To make linear progress we need an exponential amount of scientists. All the low hanging fruits have been picked.
          • bowsamic 4y ago
            Yep exactly, if 1 scientist = 1 progress, imagine where we would be right now. Instead there are far more scientists than ever but progress on the big or fundamental questions and topics has arguably slowed down
            • PartiallyTyped 4y ago
              I like to think that it's an enormous tree, and with every step that we take, the number of open topics effectively doubles.
              • bowsamic 4y ago
                Sure but there is such thing as the "base topics" which, by specialising, we do get further from. Most people aren't working on fundamentals of quantum mechanics for example. A lot of the problem is that in modern research you need to say your plan _before_ you get funding, and putting a new researcher into a field without a clearly defined project for them is considered a death sentence for any career possibility for them. Because of that reason, fields where the research has stopped progressing effectively stagnate for very long periods. No one will work on something unless there is a guarantee that high quality, impactful papers can be produced that will propel into a career
    • bowsamic 4y ago
      I think there is a limit, and that progress is not linear
      • tshaddox 4y ago
        What would the limit look like? Like would we just suddenly discover some wall in physics that makes it impossible to pursue further inquiry?
        • bowsamic 4y ago
          Yeah, some noise wall that we can’t surpass by our technology, not being able to measure to small enough precisions or with enough energy, etc.
          • outworlder 4y ago
            We would keep trying to chip at the wall regardless.
          • spaetzleesser 4y ago
            We may hit a wall in one area and make progress in others which then feeds back into the first area. I think it was always that way.
      • spaetzleesser 4y ago
        I don’t think there is a reason to think that we are close to any limit. I agree that progress is not linear.