Murray Gell-Mann: Beauty and truth in physics

Uploaded By:
TEDtalksDirector

Save & Share

Tags: Gell-Mann Murray Physics science storytelling technology Ted tedtalks

Find more videos in the "Tech" category

Want to embed this video on your blog or e-mail it to a friend? Scroll down for tools.

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.

See more videos uploaded by TEDtalksDirector

Related Videos

On Getting Creative Ideas	Three Things about Quantum Physics	The Existence of Quarks (4 of 15)

I WALK - Quarks - Monika Start	EL MODELO ESTANDAR	Book Review: The Quark and the Jaguar

Comments for this video: Show || Hide

Comments for this video on YouTube

"math,...laws in ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

"math,...laws in physics drive themselves" -- Mathematics is merely a conrtivance of the human mind, like English. Beyond that, you're just stating that the universe drives itself. My point is in regard to man's admittedly incomplete understanding of all that.
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.

"Mathematics is ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"Mathematics is merely a conrtivance of the human mind, like English. Beyond that, you're just stating that the universe drives itself." 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.

* The statments of ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

* The statments of Gell-Mann, "alfqiz" and you referenced here are tidy, but almost meaningless. Our understanding of it all remains incomplete, including math, so concepts like "accident", "something more" & "supernatural" are necessarily amorphous. Yours is particularly hollow within the context of the topic that I was addressing -- a "recursive" universe from "alfwiz" -- yet another vague notion.
* Newtons Laws (all of them) ARE the "cases". Also, I implied no need thereof for "proven".

The computational ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

The computational accuracy of QM has utility; it is the only way we have at this time to deal with the data at the sub-atomic level. But does that mean the maths truly reflects the structure of the underlying reality?
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 want to agree ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

I want to agree with your point as to his arrogance, and the complete inadequacy of his notion of 'accidents'. As you say, a century ago their previous closed system dissolved; and QM will too...soon. The fact is, in spite of our technical know-how (which indicates we are approximating to truth) we do not know the truth as to the structure of reality - and it may even be unknowable in principle.
I dislike the kind of hubris and arrogance this man expresses. It is unwarranted and unmerited.

I share your ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

I share your dislike. My concern, though, isn't so much the arrogance or lack of critical thinking, which is almost always present, but rather that Americans are taught less and less of science or of the scientific method, so more and more it's being proselytized in schools as inviolate "fact", and backed by lawyering techniques -- the polar opposite of the scientific method or any process of intellectual inquiry. Basically, it's becoming a religion.

Yes, they want ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Yes, they want technicians or acolytes, not scientists. I think that today science is the hand-maiden of the merchants. They employ most scientists and are directing educational policy in the schools and universities.
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.

"Reality slips ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"Reality slips through the net of our equations." 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.

"Basically, it's ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"Basically, it's becoming a religion." 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.

American students ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

American students stick unquestionably to a vast array of politically spawned dogma posing as science, e.g., "Global Warming" and "Evolution is a FACT"; their "churches" (universities) ARE tax exempt, regardless of the fact they proselytize Liberal theology like the glory of "affirmative" racism and the evil of national defense; Weatherman were rather big on bombings.
THUS, neither laughable nor hyperbole by your own metrics.

"American students ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"American students stick unquestionably to a vast array of politically spawned dogma posing as science, e.g., "Global Warming" and "Evolution is a FACT";" 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.

Consider: within ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Consider: within the measurement tolerance of the time Ptolemy's astronomy made predictions accurate enough to produce navigation tables. Newton's equations made accurate predictions until anomalous measurements made QM and relativity necessary.
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.

Gell-Mann's error ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Gell-Mann's error is precisely at this philosophical level - he does not have it. He cannot see beyond the horizon of QM. He presumes that alien civilisations no matter how much in advance of us would have a quantum understanding of reality. This is scientific and philosophical short-sightedness. He is entitled to his opinion. I meerly wish to point out that a little philosophical reflection will reveal that is is almost certainly wrong.

What's dogmatic is ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

What's dogmatic is the marketing of political contrivances propped up by pseudoscience, not science itself. The former is accelerating and proliferating, as I discussed, which I do find rather hellish.

"...It is why they ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"...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.

I was reading over ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

I was reading over your profile page, while not directly relevant, it underscores my guess about life being hellish for one with your ideology that sees dogma where it may not exist. 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.

Array ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Good point.
It has been goood to share views with you. Thank you and all the best.

You first claim my ... ( 3 months ago by TylerNull)

You first claim my politics are not relevant to this topic, but then use your caracature of my politics as the foundation upon which to dismiss my observations on this topic.
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 "paranoi
a and short sighted".

"You first claim my ... ( 3 months ago by kDest)

"You first claim my politics are not relevant to this topic, but then use your caracature of my politics as the foundation upon which to dismiss my observations on this topic." 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.

A little ... ( 3 months ago by diebauma)

A little philosophical reflection will reveal to you that the laws of nature are the same everywhere. Science is reality, Quantum Mechanics are reality, and reality must be understood the same by *anyone* who wishes to understand it with accuracy. Any sort of entity which lives in this universe should get the same results and eventually discover the same laws we have for QM. Believing otherwise is not understanding what science is and means.

He 'gets it' ... ( 3 months ago by DrZenith)

He 'gets it' perfectly; he's saying that any intelligent entity exploring the nature of reality would find the same rules such as the inverse square law for gravity. Also, that the scientific endeavor is the attempt to develop models which get ever closer to the way things are. Nothing short-sighted about that view.

Good point, but ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Good point, but although the inverse square law/equation describes an aspect of the functioning of gravity - it does not say what gravity is. My point is that science is punctuated by paradigm shifts, when the theorectical and equational framework changes fundamentally. QM was such a shift; in time it will itself be replaced by another. We cannot presume our present model is final; or that another civ will follow exactly the same pattern of discovery as we have. models are maps, not reality.

Good point, but ... ( 3 months ago by siddhaam)

Emergence is unable ... ( 1 month ago by seanmPWH)

Emergence is unable to account for it's own existence.

Tell a friend: