Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Philosophy Explorer » Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:03 am

I can say there are many candidates. It seems at many forums, people have their favorites.

PhilX

surreptitious57
Posts: 1605
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:32 am

Do you mean theory in the scientific sense or the lay sense. The thing I accept as true although it is counter intuitive is the behaviour of two
non local particles. Also that from the internal reference frame of a photon time does not exist even though the speed of light is finite. With
regard to mere hypotheses the notion that time or space or both do not actually exist because they are nothing more than mental constructs

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:41 pm

Well, ya gotta distinguish between the ontology and the epistemology. Take the Ptolemaic model of the universe. We all know that the ontology is wrong-the Earth is not the centre of the universe. However, in epistemic terms, you can use the model to calculate where a particular planet (at least the ones which are visible to the naked eye) will appear in the sky. You don't even have to believe it; you look up and there it is, pretty much. With regard to something like String theory, it may well be the case that the properties and behaviour of particles can be described by mono-dimensional filaments vibrating in a whole bunch of dimensions, but personally, I find it much harder to believe that is actually the case.

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Philosophy Explorer » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:20 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:32 am
Do you mean theory in the scientific sense or the lay sense. The thing I accept as true although it is counter intuitive is the behaviour of two
non local particles. Also that from the internal reference frame of a photon time does not exist even though the speed of light is finite. With
regard to mere hypotheses the notion that time or space or both do not actually exist because they are nothing more than mental constructs
The scientific sense is what I mean. There are so many theories I wouldn't know where to begin as to what's acceptable and what isn't. I know scientists accept the BBT which I find a struggle to accept myself, e.g.

PhilX

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by uwot » Sun Jul 30, 2017 12:29 am

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:20 pm
I know scientists accept the BBT which I find a struggle to accept myself, e.g.

PhilX
I take it you haven't read my blog http://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk It explains why scientists believe the BBT. It also explains that, generally, the theories physicists use are the ones that work. There is a difference between a mathematical model and a concept of reality on which a mathematical model is based. The fact is that experiments and observations are still finding things we haven't seen before, so physicists are trying to think of causes for them, which you may or may not find believable, but in the meantime, the observations can be recorded, analysed and described mathematically.

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Philosophy Explorer » Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:01 am

uwot wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 12:29 am
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:20 pm
I know scientists accept the BBT which I find a struggle to accept myself, e.g.

PhilX
I take it you haven't read my blog http://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk It explains why scientists believe the BBT. It also explains that, generally, the theories physicists use are the ones that work. There is a difference between a mathematical model and a concept of reality on which a mathematical model is based. The fact is that experiments and observations are still finding things we haven't seen before, so physicists are trying to think of causes for them, which you may or may not find believable, but in the meantime, the observations can be recorded, analysed and described mathematically.
I don't need to read a blog to know what's in vogue today
may be out of vogue tomorrow. The Standard Model is a stronger example of a theory that would be undergoing a serious adjustment.

PhilX 🇺🇸

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by uwot » Sun Jul 30, 2017 6:11 am

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:01 am
I don't need to read a blog to know what's in vogue today
may be out of vogue tomorrow.
Up to you, but it's a good place to start exploring.
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:01 am
The Standard Model is a stronger example of a theory that would be undergoing a serious adjustment.

PhilX 🇺🇸
It's based on the Standard Model of particle physics and the lambda cold dark matter cosmological model, which is also standard. It's not really a case of their being in vogue; they are the best explanations we have of current observations.

surreptitious57
Posts: 1605
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:55 am

The Standard Model can not account for dark energy or dark matter which between them make up 96 per cent of observable
physical reality. And neither does it unify Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. So there is still much more to be done

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Philosophy Explorer » Sun Jul 30, 2017 1:30 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:55 am
The Standard Model can not account for dark energy or dark matter which between them make up 96 per cent of observable
physical reality. And neither does it unify Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. So there is still much more to be done
Well put.

PhilX 🇺🇸

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by uwot » Sun Jul 30, 2017 1:56 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:55 am
The Standard Model can not account for dark energy or dark matter which between them make up 96 per cent of observable
physical reality.
The Standard Model is really just a description of all the particles and forces we know exist, with the exception of gravity, having seen them in colliders, like the LHC. It's an extremely accurate model in that respect, but you are quite right, as well as gravity, it doesn't account for dark energy or dark matter. I have given a description of the mechanism I think might explain gravity. Dark energy is just the name for whatever is causing the acceleration of cosmic expansion, and I have suggested a mechanism for that too. Dark matter is postulated as the source of gravity which prevents stars being flung out of galaxies, which at the rate they are spinning, there isn't enough visible matter, other stars, to do. Personally, I think if objects are spinning, there should in effect be 'ether drag' (terrible name), so that gravity is strongest in the plane of rotation. The fact that solar systems are in a single plane, as are most galaxies, suggests this is the case. That quasars only eject material from their polar regions is further evidence.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:55 am
And neither does it unify Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity.
Well, no. No one has ever seen a graviton; if we do, general relativity is toast.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:55 am
So there is still much more to be done
Absolutely.

User avatar
Necromancer
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Necromancer » Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:16 pm

The Higgs Boson is not credible, I think. That one certain mass, 125 GeV, is somehow "magically" supposed to explain all other mass... Funny! Weird! :shock:

The string theory, M-theory, or any other, also seems incoherent, but more studies remain. I'm not there yet though I'm being led by a certain classical physics Chinese scientist. 8)

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 2857
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: right here

Post by henry quirk » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:34 pm

"Which physics theory is hardest to believe?"

Here's two pieces of bullshit...

*A cat can exist in an 'uncertain' state, not dead, not alive.

*That all possible versions of an event, or universe, are real.

That there cat is one or the other even if unobserved. It's alive or it's dead, never both at once. You, not seein' the cat, may wonder about its status, but its status is independent of you (unless you're the one who offed it), not dependent on your 'measurement'.

While there may be (always 'is', in fact) multiple perspectives on an event, there's only one goddamned event, or universe. So, if you're a drunk 'here and now' there's no solace to be had in thinkin' about all the versions of you who aren't...cuz they don't exist ('cept in your sotted imagination).

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by uwot » Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:16 am

Necromancer wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:16 pm
The Higgs Boson is not credible, I think. That one certain mass, 125 GeV, is somehow "magically" supposed to explain all other mass... Funny! Weird! :shock:
That's not how it works. It's the Higgs Field that gives fundamental particles mass. Essentially, if you think of a heavy thing as being difficult to move, you have to flip that on its head, and think of something that is difficult to move as heavy. A bit like moving through water is more difficult than walking through air, the Higgs Field slows fundamental particles down. In effect, if you hit the Higgs Field hard enough, you will break a piece off-a Higgs Boson-but that doesn't play any part in giving other particles mass. (Most of the mass of atoms is from the interactions in the quark-gluon field in the nucleus, though.)
Necromancer wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:16 pm
The string theory, M-theory, or any other, also seems incoherent, but more studies remain. I'm not there yet though I'm being led by a certain classical physics Chinese scientist. 8)
Who knows? They may yet prove useful in analysing the world, but I'd be surprised if they actually describe it.

uwot
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re:

Post by uwot » Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:25 am

henry quirk wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:34 pm
Here's two pieces of bullshit...

*A cat can exist in an 'uncertain' state, not dead, not alive.

*That all possible versions of an event, or universe, are real.
Well yeah. It what you sometimes get when physicists do philosophy, and why more hard nosed physicists tell them to shut up and calculate.

Dubious
Posts: 1502
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Which physics theory is hardest to believe?

Post by Dubious » Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:34 am

Probably the one most likely to survive.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests