| Dodece said: @Dr.Grass How wonderful we have an apologist for the physics community. Actually you are quite wrong the biggest problem in modern physics is that the theory of General Relativity, and the Standard Model in Quantum Mechanics are both mutually antagonistic. They fail to make accurate predictions when at different scales. Quantum Mechanics is not born out in the reality of the very large, and General Relativity fails miserably at describing the motions of atoms. Then to complicate matters further the math for both theories refuse to cooperate with one another. It is the dirty secret of modern physics. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics despise one another, and if the greatest minds are all that you trust then take it from the horses mouth. Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics, and spent much of his life trying to disprove the theory by highlighting the paradoxes the theory produced. What do you think he was talking about when he said god doesn't play dice. I am not saying the man was a saint either he is equally guilty of what I am talking about. When confronted with the implication that the math told him the Universe could not be static, and thus must be either expanding or contracting. He ignored that implication, and fabricated the Universal Constant. See he didn't like the idea of a Universe that wasn't static so he pulled something out of his ass. So he could ignore something he found uncomfortable. Later when he was proven wrong he swiftly removed the Constant, but it doesn't really change the fact that he fudged the math. I am vehemently opposed to the notion that the flaws of a existing theory should be tolerated, because there is no available substitute. Science should never be about entrenched thought, but in trusting the data. Galileo was forced to recant, because he debunked Aristotle. Thankfully by the time of Einstein nobody was threatening to kill him for debunking Newton. You see it isn't so much that Physicists are blind to these things. They are just simply refusing to grapple with the problems by and large. I just want them to admit that it is procrastination, and nothing less. I am tired of so much cowardice. Of avoiding dealing with the big problems, because they could be maddening. |
This is useless, trite dramatization.
There's no "dirty secrets" here: every problem with temptative theories that tried to integrate general relativity and QM are there in the open for anyone with the will and the intellectual tools to grasp them. All the mathematical problems, all the frustrations and weird ideas, all the phylosophical clashing is part of an ongoing open process. Everyone in the field knows what goes on, and there's no other field like theoretical physics where specialists try constantly to divulgate very difficult and technical subjects to the masses.
Einstein didn't "hate" QM. He was actually one of the fathers of the theory, but he hoped that what is technically called a realistic framework of QM could be developed. Thus the EPR paradox, thus Bell's work, thus Aspect's experiments. Had Einstein lived to see all of that, he'd have conceded the point and maybe changed his angle of attack.
Einstein didn't "fabricate" the cosmological constant, either, nor "fudge the math". It's a temptative modification of field equations that allowed for a stationary universe, introduced before there was indication on actual cosmological dynamics. But the point is that Einstein was ready to abandon it as soon as redshift experimental data seemed to indicate an expanding universe.
That's what scientists do. They have hunches, phylosphical points of view and tastes. In the end, the whole point of scientific collaboration and peer review is that this individuality won't harm proper advancement.
Physicists don't cling to the special relativity for affection or folklore. They aren't papering of cracks or ignoring "flaws", nor are they keeping any secret. They are simply making informed decisions. Special relativity with its mathematical and phylosophical framework has been tested against millions of times in thousands of different experiments and practical applications.
Simple statistic and epistemic thus requires to be prudent because the overall mass of past experiences makes such a potential breakthrough less likely than problems with experimental setup and data analysis. Most physicists on earth will be delighted if the results are replicated in different conditions and new physics is actually testable.
Frankly, you sound like an armchair commenter (it's the cosmological constant, and the standard model has nothing to do with the troubles of QM with general relativity, nor is the problem the motion of atoms, nor did Einstein debunk Newton). Before harping on faults and psychology of the physics community, which needs no apologists of course, maybe you should make an act of humility and admit that you don't know enough to take an informed stance.
Educate yourself and you'll be able to delve into an incredible variety of materials instead of invoking vague problems with the community from the outside. Physicists tackle big intellectual problems every day, don't call "cowardice" when it's rather your ignorance.
