Q: How do we know if science is right?

Physicist: Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a “proof” in the physical sciences.  The best you can do is a disproof.  At the end of the day science is more about “what works” than it is about “what’s real”.

Worse than that, you’ll find frequently that reasonable questions will have no answer, or will have several (but indistinguishable) answers.  For example, you could ask a question like “What’s happening over there right now?”  But relativity shows that any question involving “now” makes no sense, or at least needs to be rephrased.

Also for example: Light can be polarized linearly (regular up-down or left-right), or it can be polarized circularly (clockwise or counter-clockwise).  Circularly polarized light can be described in terms of linear polarization, and linearly polarized light can be described in terms of circular polarization.  So which type of polarization is the true type?  There may be an answer, but there is provably no way to ever find out.

Posted in -- By the Physicist, Philosophical | 5 Comments

Q: How plausible is it that the laws of physics may actually function differently in other parts of the universe?

Mathematician: My two cents are that astronomical evidence (what we can tell about galaxies from here on earth) indicates that the laws of newtonian mechanics and gravitation in space are just the same they are here. I imagine that some quantum mechanical laws in space are harder to verify, but no one has ever observed an experiment that varied as a function of the location where it was performed. In other words, I would say that there is no evidence that the laws of physics function differently elsewhere in the universe. Of course, that doesn’t mean that there is NO CHANCE that they differ, just that there is no reason to think they do.


Physicist: To date there is strong evidence that physical laws are identical everywhere. At the very least all the laws governing atomic spectra and fusion are the same (starlight) which covers just a hell of a lot.  You could also argue (not a proof) that the fundamental postulates or relativity need all positions (and all constant velocities) to have the same physical laws.
Most importantly, there is absolutely no evidence to imply that the laws change anywhere/when.

Posted in -- By the Mathematician, -- By the Physicist, Astronomy, Philosophical, Physics | 16 Comments

Q: Are there an infinite number of prime numbers?

Physicist: Yes.  Here’s a proof (there are many):
1) Assume there are a finite number of primes.
2) Multiply them all together and add 1.
3) This new number is not divisible by any of the original primes so it must be a new prime (or be divisible by at least one new prime).

This means that no matter how many primes exist, there must be at least one more.  But that’s a one way trip to infinity.
This is a contradiction, so the assumption that there are a finite number of primes is hereby debunked.
There are actually dozens of different proofs of “the infinitude of primes” but this one is probably the simplest.

Posted in -- By the Physicist, Math | 8 Comments

Q: How can we prove that 2+2 always equals 4?

Physicist: In this case there’s no proof. With the exception of 0 and 1, all numbers are defined in terms of simpler numbers. “4” is Defined as “1+1+1+1”. And “2”is Defined as “1+1”.

Posted in -- By the Physicist, Equations, Math, Philosophical | 35 Comments