Towards the end of the 19th Century someone claimed that all of physics was known and that all that remained was to measure fundamental constants. Then they discovered electron diffraction...
The notion that we are at the end of what can be understood is fairly ludicrous, the problem is that to probe higher energy scales would require an unbelievably expensive particle accelerator - the barrier is financial rather than conceptual. With unlimited resources we could simply build a cyclotron that girdles the moon's equator which could probably probe GUT scale physics. The moon is easier to do this on than the earth as there's no tectonic activity, but it would cost an insane amount of money to build. So, in a sense, the article belongs in Yahoo finance.
Originally posted by whodeyOnly if they are particularly dumb undergraduates.
You can actually hear the cheers in the background from undergraduates and graduates around the globe.
If it really was 'the end of physics' it would negate the need for undergraduates to learn physics, after all a typical undergraduate program stays within what is already known anyway. If they planed to go on to do research in physics then 'the end of physics' would imply they would be out of a job.
I really can't see what they should be cheering about.
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot sure who whodey is talking about but the audience at TEDtalks generally have to pay for extremely expensive tickets and are thus unlikely to be (under)graduate students but more likely to be wealthy people who like to hear dumbass oneliners like "the end of physics."
Only if they are particularly dumb undergraduates.
If it really was 'the end of physics' it would negate the need for undergraduates to learn physics, after all a typical undergraduate program stays within what is already known anyway. If they planed to go on to do research in physics then 'the end of physics' would imply they would be out of a job.
I really can't see what they should be cheering about.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
Originally posted by DeepThoughtPhysics probably has a limit, in that it will never be able to ultimately answer "why".; However, I doubt it can ever run out of "How's" and
Towards the end of the 19th Century someone claimed that all of physics was known and that all that remained was to measure fundamental constants. Then they discovered electron diffraction...
The notion that we are at the end of what can be understood is fairly ludicrous, the problem is that to probe higher energy scales would require an unbelievably ...[text shortened]... cost an insane amount of money to build. So, in a sense, the article belongs in Yahoo finance.
"Whats"...
Its pretty neat to picture yourself as a organizational structure of sub-atomic particles/waves (whatever they are at that level) in constant communication with the universe connecting "you" to everything else in it (that is also effectively "you"😉, effecting the state of the system. Will physics someday calculate our purpose ( our contribution to the net effect or end state of the universe)? I somehow doubt it. The only thing that can do a calculation like that is the system (universe) itself. Perhaps that is our purpose. Maybe this is just a simulation. At some point we may just hit a virtual wall, and find out that our "laws of physics" are not absolute at all (just a highly intelligent programmers code), and that we are not truly conscious. I can imagine a highly intelligent robot would struggle with with similar problems of consciousness that we encounter in the depths of our own consciousness. That's probably why we innately fear AI, because in deep places we don't talk about at parties (to often) we know its true. Why else is there such a strong guttural and negative (almost nauseating) response to this concept? So anyhow, I do personally believe when we get to that point physics will have an end and we will go insane. Until then, Cheers!
The title of the OP link is pretty stupid:
"The 2 most dangerous numbers in the universe are threatening the end of physics"
Really? How would two numbers end all what we know about physics? Would those two numbers suddenly change the law of gravity and suddenly stop planets orbiting in ellipses? would all our computers and technology suddenly stop working?
Or would those two numbers physically stop physicists entering their physics lab or doing physics experiments or even thinking about physics?
What total nonsense!
Originally posted by humySince one of them determines the masses of particles having it change so everything becomes fifteen orders of magnitude heavier might interfere with planets orbiting in ellipses and the other things you mentioned.
The title of the OP link is pretty stupid:
"The 2 most dangerous numbers in the universe are threatening the end of physics"
Really? How would two numbers end all what we know about physics? Would those two numbers suddenly change the law of gravity and suddenly stop planets orbiting in ellipses? would all our computers and technology suddenly stop workin ...[text shortened]... r physics lab or doing physics experiments or even thinking about physics?
What total nonsense!
Originally posted by DeepThoughtIf the numbers changed, yes, but I suspect humy was asking what would happen if we knew the numbers.
Since one of them determines the masses of particles having it change so everything becomes fifteen orders of magnitude heavier might interfere with planets orbiting in ellipses and the other things you mentioned.
The thread title isn't saying 'if the numbers change its the end of physics'. The thread title is saying 'we are about to discover everything that can possibly be known therefore its the end of physics'.
Originally posted by twhiteheadOh now I see. I didn't get what he was getting at at first.
If the numbers changed, yes, but I suspect humy was asking what would happen if we knew the numbers.
The thread title isn't saying 'if the numbers change its the end of physics'. The thread title is saying 'we are about to discover everything that can possibly be known therefore its the end of physics'.
To prevent that type of misunderstanding, I shouldn't have said:
"Would those two numbers suddenly change ..."
but rather said:
"Would knowing those two numbers suddenly change ..."