MU-4: Is Qualitative Understanding a Possibility?

Continuation of Parts 1, 2 and 3…

Ok, so we know about the dominance of maths. But has the maths now taken over completely? Are physicists increasingly “working on mathematics rather than physics”, asks Sabine Hossenfelder? Has the trust in maths crossed the Rubicon:
“Somewhere along the line many physicists have come to believe that it must be possible to formulate a theory without observational input, based on pure logic and some sense of aesthetics. They must believe their brains have a mystical connection to the universe and pure power of thought will tell them the laws of nature.”

Of course, many physicists warn against going overboard. Like Lee Smolin:
“The idea that the truth about nature can be wrestled from pure thought through mathematics is overdone…The idea that mathematics is prophetic and that mathematical structure and beauty is a clue to how nature ultimately works is just wrong.”
But why not just test the predictions of the maths against observed reality, you ask? Surely that would settle the issue. Ah, that’s the problem. The kinds of experiments to test modern theories are so expensive and elaborate that testing is not easy. Even worse, more and more of those theories imply the existence of multiverses (multiple universes!) which, by definition, cannot interact with our universe (if they did, they would just be part of our universe!).

Then there’s the concept of mathematical beauty that is repeatedly said about something called string theory that has never been verified and even worse, looks like can’t be proven anytime soon either:
“Superstrings produced some of the most complex and, to its supporters, beautiful mathematics ever devised.”
Yes, maths can be beautiful! But is mathematical beauty any indication of truth? Besides, doesn’t (mathematical) beauty lie in the eyes of the beholder anyway?

But even as the maths gets impossibly accurate and yet not give us any understanding about the underlying reality (whatever that means), that didn’t stop the odd physicist like Richard Feynman from coming up with ways of visualizing things because that acted as such a good aid whether or not they were true! How useful Feynman’s techniques were in the fog of that era is best expressed by James Bjorken:
“When Feynman diagrams arrived, it was the sun breaking through the clouds, complete with rainbow and pot of gold.”

So what’s the future of knowledge going to be? Even more maths, even more accuracy but very little understanding of what is going on?! Feynman hoped that things may change in the future:
“The next great era of awakening of human intellect may well produce a method of understanding the qualitative content of equations.”
Is that even possible? Sounds impossible today but then again, as a species, we’ve been wrong so many times before. I guess only time will tell…

To be continued…

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Image
As a toddler, my daughter loved Alia Bhatt’s songs, esp. the ones from Student of the Year . (That movie did have many good songs and well-choreographed dances). Fast forward to present day, when she is 12 yo. She rarely watches Hindi movies now, but one of the few ones she likes of late, Raja aur Rani ki Prem Kahani has, yes, Alia Bhatt.   If I had any hopes that there was anything to be read in the name of her toddler-time favorite ( Student of the Year ), they have been dashed. Our conversations come exam time are perfectly captured by this photo and its caption: In fact, the pic below captures how she and I look at her answer sheets – me intently, she with an expression of “It’s over, so why are you even looking at it?”   Of late, we pull her leg and tell her that she isn’t showing any signs of academic prowess, she’d better find a rich guy to marry. Some time later, she showed us this meme on the Internet: “Me No Study, Me No Care Me Go Marry Millionaire ...
Read more

Why we Deceive Ourselves

In their book, The Elephant in the Brain , the authors describe this weird aspect of deception that we practice: deceiving ourselves! That is so weird: “If our minds contain maps of our worlds, what good comes from having an inaccurate version of these maps?” The Sigmund Freud school of thought treats self-deception as a defense mechanism, “a way for the ego to protect itself”. The mind seeks to protect itself from anxiety and other negative emotions. Many object to this reasoning: since accurate information is so critical to our survival, surely distorting information would be dangerous. Wouldn’t the goal of protecting our self-esteem have been better achieved by making the brain’s self-esteem mechanism stronger instead? The new school of thought explains self-deception as “primarily outward-facing, manipulative, and ultimately self-serving”. This is based on Thomas Schelling’s work on game theory: “In a variety of scenarios, limiting or sabotaging yourself is the winn...
Read more

Europe #3 - Innsbruck

The last city we visited in Europe was Innsbruck in the Austrian Alps. After the cold and windy experience (at times) of Paris and Netherlands, Innsbruck was a wonderful change – it didn’t feel that cold, it was not windy all of which made it easy to walk around. Something absolutely necessary given how scenic the place is.   Since the hotel check-in time was much later in the day, we left the baggage and went to the Swarovski HQ-cum-museum about an hour by bus from Innsbruck. The crystal exhibits were brilliant – colorful, bright, shiny. Jewellery aside, it was a display of what one can do with crystals. While my wife and daughter loved the jewellery, I liked the superhero themed exhibits of Batman, Spiderman, the Hulk, and Star Wars. We didn’t buy anything there, though we did buy stuff in the Swarovski store in Innsbruck – jewellery, not the superhero stuff.   Innsbruck is a major tourist attraction during the skiing season but now in summer, we saw many groups of ...
Read more