Murray Gell-Mann: Beauty and truth in physics
Uploaded by: TEDtalksDirector
Video Description:
http://www.ted.com Wielding laypeople's terms and a sense of humor, Nobel Prize winner Murray Gell-Mann drops some knowledge about particle physics, asking questions like, Are elegant equations more likely to be right than inelegant ones? Can the fundamental law, the so-called "theory of everything," really explain everything? His answers will surprise you.
Tags for this video: Gell-Mann Murray Physics science storytelling technology Ted tedtalks
Find more videos in the "Tech" category
See more videos uploaded by TEDtalksDirector
| Three Things about Quantum Physics | On Getting Creative Ideas | The Existence of Quarks (4 of 15) |
 |  |  |
| I WALK - Quarks - Monika Start | EL MODELO ESTANDAR | Book Review: The Quark and the Jaguar |
 |  |  |
Share This Video:
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Tell a friend:
Regarding quantum mechanics (observables) v. theory, see my 2nd post.
Regarding broken law (not just theory), one such set are Newton's, which Einstein fixed. One person's ignornace is not another's lack of credibility.
I said that the universe drives itself with those forces we model using math without a need for something more.
"One person's ignornace is not another's lack of credibility."
Without specifying a case, you make none. You seem to be ignorant of the fact that nothing can be proven in science, so it must always bend with the evidence of observation.
* Newtons Laws (all of them) ARE the "cases". Also, I implied no need thereof for "proven".
If I use inches to measure a real distance, I cannot say there are x inches actually in the real distance. Math does not map onto reality. For instance, the equations of physics are symmetrical - but reality is not.
Reality slips through the net of our equations.
I dislike the kind of hubris and arrogance this man expresses. It is unwarranted and unmerited.
I dont think they want too much critical thinking being done by the general population. They might begin to see through the scams of politics and economy; and their plans for a New World Order.
I think you're being more philosophical on the nature of knowledge and math than anything else.
The obvious truth, anyway, is that if a model makes accurate predictions about a system, then it describes the nature of that system. You can always ask if there is some reality deeper, or a need for more accuracy, but it seems like pushing the goalpost ahead, unless an actual underlying reality were discovered.
Oh boy, talk about jumping the gun.
When American students stick unquestioningly to gradualism and try to have it mandated as dogma in legislation, and try to establish tax-exempt churches of Gell-Mann, and bomb and set fire to schools that teach heterodox interpretations of quantum theory, THEN your statement might not be taken as laughable hyperbole.
THUS, neither laughable nor hyperbole by your own metrics.
No wonder you said that then, you seem to have misinformation about the consensus on Global Warming, Evolution (how it can be both fact and theory). Life must be hell when you think scientific theories are dogmatic.
I don't really care to argue these things, but it did illuminate for me your position when you explained further.
Philosophical or not, these are accurate observations.
This philosophical understanding of human knowing is the foundation of the work of the greatest scientists. It is why they are able to see beyond the science orthodoxy of their times.
I'm not in opposition of you on this point or those you made before it, I just think that if there is something more than quantum mechanics, it will be found. Until quantum mechanics hits that wall where something better is needed, I am not complaining about it.
Outcries against treason, associating the good of one's nation with a party ideology, sound frankly paranoid and short sighted. That sort of thinking makes one easily manipulated, which makes it no surprise that the "right" has been led by the nose by the church and business interests for decades.
It has been goood to share views with you. Thank you and all the best.
THAT sort of "reasoning" is a good example of the point of my above post.
You obviously disagree with my politics. What's insighful is that yours require you to declare mine as evidence of a diseased mind. If it makes you feel any better, I find that hellish, too. Finally, disgust is not "paranoia and short sighted".
They were musings and were admittedly irrelevant to the topic.
"What's insighful is that yours require you to declare mine as evidence of a diseased mind."
I don't have politics, actually. I find most politics to be vacuous.