'Physical Reality', sounds strange doesn't it ? Is there a reality that is not physical ? You think to yourself; 'This could be one of those strange terms that specialists who come to speak on Chnadrayan or LHC might use!'. Luckily it isn't. It's just a complex word for Feynman's Red ball that does weird stuff.
One of the things I love to do is to read up Physics. After being introduced to 'Advanced Physics' so to speak (well better than +2 at least) I have found it to be full of equations of all kind. You want to model a pendulum swinging or a coconut falling, you just make a few (or a lot sometimes :) ) assumptions, then write down equations which deals with whatever quantities you want and try to solve them and what they say. Looking at this, it is quite tempting to say that solving equations is physics. Even I did think that for a while. But now what I've started to think (might be wrong though) is that equations just summarize a picture/model of reality you have in your head. You keep constantly changing and developing it and try to understand what these equations really mean. Once you have a model, you test it out and becomes happy if it works out and you correct it if its wrong as you go along. I don't know how well this would apply to extremely mathematical fields like Quantum Mechanics and the ensemble where its very difficult to make head or tail out of something like Schrodinger's Equation, but maybe that is what sets apart ordinary physicists from people like Feynman and Einstein.
Feynman talks about this in his book 'Surely You're Joking Mr.Feynman' in the chapters where he talks about going to Japan. He says that Japanese scientists would have a jumble of very mathematical equations which he wouldn't follow at first but then he would start thinking about a ball or some object and modify its properties like give it hairs or change its color as more conditions are imposed on it. If at some point the equations go against his weird ball, he knows they're wrong. I have tried doing this and I have discovered that it would require extraordinary understanding of mathematics and of reality so that one to one correspondences can be made which I don't currently posses. For ordinary people like me it might not be possible but on the other hand, before jumping on to write down equations for a problem maybe we can think of what would happen if we did the experiment and do it in our heads. If what your head shows you is correct then your model is verified and if it's wrong its time to throw out some stuff from your head. You just create a picture of reality and play with it :)
Now all this might sound a bit crazy since the reality is out there and don't we see it every day ? Usually we do see it, but we notice how or why things are happening most of the time. We don't know what laws governs stuff or if there are laws at all ! This is where mathematics comes in to model reality into forms that can be manipulated. My guess is that to be a good scientist you have to know mathematics well but also you have to know how to look beyond it !
One of the things I love to do is to read up Physics. After being introduced to 'Advanced Physics' so to speak (well better than +2 at least) I have found it to be full of equations of all kind. You want to model a pendulum swinging or a coconut falling, you just make a few (or a lot sometimes :) ) assumptions, then write down equations which deals with whatever quantities you want and try to solve them and what they say. Looking at this, it is quite tempting to say that solving equations is physics. Even I did think that for a while. But now what I've started to think (might be wrong though) is that equations just summarize a picture/model of reality you have in your head. You keep constantly changing and developing it and try to understand what these equations really mean. Once you have a model, you test it out and becomes happy if it works out and you correct it if its wrong as you go along. I don't know how well this would apply to extremely mathematical fields like Quantum Mechanics and the ensemble where its very difficult to make head or tail out of something like Schrodinger's Equation, but maybe that is what sets apart ordinary physicists from people like Feynman and Einstein.
Feynman talks about this in his book 'Surely You're Joking Mr.Feynman' in the chapters where he talks about going to Japan. He says that Japanese scientists would have a jumble of very mathematical equations which he wouldn't follow at first but then he would start thinking about a ball or some object and modify its properties like give it hairs or change its color as more conditions are imposed on it. If at some point the equations go against his weird ball, he knows they're wrong. I have tried doing this and I have discovered that it would require extraordinary understanding of mathematics and of reality so that one to one correspondences can be made which I don't currently posses. For ordinary people like me it might not be possible but on the other hand, before jumping on to write down equations for a problem maybe we can think of what would happen if we did the experiment and do it in our heads. If what your head shows you is correct then your model is verified and if it's wrong its time to throw out some stuff from your head. You just create a picture of reality and play with it :)
Now all this might sound a bit crazy since the reality is out there and don't we see it every day ? Usually we do see it, but we notice how or why things are happening most of the time. We don't know what laws governs stuff or if there are laws at all ! This is where mathematics comes in to model reality into forms that can be manipulated. My guess is that to be a good scientist you have to know mathematics well but also you have to know how to look beyond it !
Comments
Post a Comment