• pmk@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        Whenever I think about magnets I remember this Feynman interview where someone asks him why magnets behave the way they do, and he says that to answer a “why”-question you need a foundation where something is agreed to be true, and it seems like for electromagnetic forces we end up in " because that’s how the universe is apparently".

        • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure, but between nothing and the axioms of the standard model we end up with a fairly comprehensive description which can predict how different kinds of magnets behave in a wide variety of situations.

            • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              No, the theory of electromagnetism and by extension physics in general is knowing how it works. How to use it is engineering, a different set of knowledge which we also have some of.

              • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                I think they mean more the difference between what rules it follows and why it follows those rules. It sounds like we know more about the “what” but not much about the “why” for magnets (or any of the fundamental forces).

          • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            I’d expect nothing less from a scientist. Decrying pedantry from a scientist would be like decrying financial accuracy from an accountant.

          • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            This seems to be easily said of anyone trying to popularize science philosophy.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            That is sort of how the universe operates though. You can have a greater and greater understanding of the underlying principles of physics but eventually you do get to “that just how it is”. Why is there no such thing as a negative photon, apparently we just can’t have a negative excitation in the photon field, no one knows why.

            • Fedizen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              I mean one of the points he’s making there comes up in every good science class: science doesn’t answer ‘why’ it answers ‘how’. The goal of science is to describe what we see in the world; science less about explaining things. Its easy to do without being a pedant. He’s absolutely being pedantic on camera in that clip.

              Like if you look at how people treat science now: MAGA completely pissing on it because its funded by snake oil people. Rich guys like Elon Musk cynically using it as a way to bilk the public and government. The press just has different goals than the scientific community and I would say that clip showed some of that friction manifest.

        • VinegarChunks@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          With a lot of things:

          You start off with no knowledge, and it’s a big mystery.

          You gain some knowledge and feel like you have understanding.

          You gain a lot more knowledge and you learn how much more there is that isn’t known.

          The President is either at stage 1 or stage 3, take your pick.