Can Physics Actually Prove Anything? - James Ellias, DemystifySci +423

Listen to DemystifySci at all podcast locations: https://anchor.fm/demystifysci Our book, Paradox Lost, is now on pre-sale! https://buy.stripe.com/7sY7sKdoN5d29eUdYddEs0b Listen to our music everywhere, download at Bandcamp, or pick up a record here: https://demystifysci-shop.fourthwall.com/products/vinyl-lp-secretary-of-nature-everything-is-so-good-here

The best reason for scientists to study philosophy is that it, epistemology in particular, demonstrates that epistemic humility is the only sensible posture to adopt in relation to our knowledge and explanation of the world, whatever we mean by that. As you say, we have no idea what we don't know nor can we know.

The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round. lol, this guy

Looking forward to reading Paradox Lost.

I was on a bus. There were about six special needs adults on that bus. For about 10 minutes, there was a steady barrage of each one saying to another: “Your stoopid” … “No you’re stupid” No Joe is stoopid I’m not.”….. The first 45+ minutes of this vid was just like that. No one listening, no one learning, each just trying to score a win, and none aware how “stoopid” they sound to the rest of us on that bus listening in. Drop the egos, try harder. _(Edit):_ I spoke too soon, it was 150 minutes on the short bus.

The question will always be to we understand all the variables? The closer you look the more variables are at play.

Learning about non-linear oscillators, chaos and all that in Junior-level Classical Mechanics course put the *"WOW!"* back into Physics for me. Thanks, Professor Peter Scott (1933-2024), UC Santa Cruz (1983)! We studied the Düffing Oscillator and he had a real demo of it as well. The Logistic Map was another goodie he encouraged us to play with on a computer. We covered perturbation theory in the context of non-linear oscillators and the 3-body central force problem; it's fascinating how complexity arises when you "tweak things just a bit". Physics Honchos like Poincaré worked on non-linear mechanics in the early 1900's; he and others showed that "these are *really* hard problems". Little more was done up to Edward Lorenz's modeling of weather in 1963, with the arrival of digital computers. Non-linear systems are covered in "Nonlinear Oscillations" Ch.5 of "Classical Dynamics" (2nd ed.) by Jerry Marion, and in "Canonical Perturbation Theory" Ch.11 of "Classical Mechanics" (2nd ed.) by Herbert Goldstein. "Chaos: Making a New Science" by James Gleick is still a great read.

Definitional retreat is a rhetorical tactic where someone changes the meaning of a word to avoid addressing an objection to their original claim. This strategy allows the speaker to evade accountability by shifting definitions rather than admitting their argument was too broad or incorrect.

Body is awareness, body can be used in many ways there is no direct explanation of a body. Example “mass in a body”, they were more inclined about “mass” rather than “body” but they used body as just a tool for awareness.

James Ellias got it, congratulations ! You are on the right way and the greatest realist I can imagine. But there is 100 years of work to do to get physics back to reality and there is that extreme amount of money acting against the reality.