Go Back   Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

Theoretical Physics Theoretical Physics Help Forum

Like Tree10Likes
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Apr 30th 2018, 04:21 PM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 92
QM wave packets and Planck energy element (hv). Also, I have a question. How certain are you of theoretical and experimental physics?


A. 100% certain (without a doubt--->SLAM DUNK).

B. Almost 100% certain (such as, negative probability, and, induction/luminous questions*).



*really small questions.

Last edited by lovebunny; Apr 30th 2018 at 04:30 PM.
lovebunny is offline  
Old Apr 30th 2018, 04:29 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Somerset, England
Posts: 964
A. 100% certain. (without a doubt)
There are at least three different meanings to a probability of 1.

Which definition are you after?
topsquark likes this.
studiot is offline  
Old Apr 30th 2018, 04:58 PM   #13
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 92
Yet the definition of theoretical is:

concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application.

"a theoretical physicist"

synonyms: hypothetical, abstract, conjectural, academic, suppositional, speculative, notional, postulatory, what-if, assumed, presumed, untested, unproven, unsubstantiated

"it's just a theoretical situation"

Can you explain the difference between your answer of A and the definition of theoretical physics?

Last edited by lovebunny; Apr 30th 2018 at 05:04 PM.
lovebunny is offline  
Old Apr 30th 2018, 07:38 PM   #14
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,382
Originally Posted by lovebunny View Post
Yet the definition of theoretical is:

concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application.

"a theoretical physicist"

synonyms: hypothetical, abstract, conjectural, academic, suppositional, speculative, notional, postulatory, what-if, assumed, presumed, untested, unproven, unsubstantiated

"it's just a theoretical situation"

Can you explain the difference between your answer of A and the definition of theoretical physics?
Theory is never perfect. A theory must be able to predict some (new or existing) quantity or quality, usually many times tested by several people/labs. The best theories correctly predict many new kinds of testable phenomena in which case the bulk of the Physics community (and usually the public) accepts it... at least until something new comes up that it can't handle. Look at Newton's theory of Gravity. It took over 200 years for someone to find a new theory to replace it with mainly because the GR corrections are usually very small.

Experimenters can be both right and wrong. Ignoring any ingenuity of experimental design experimentalists are limited by the accuracy of their machines, which is another reason that experiments are performed multiple times and by other experimenters.

Generally the public, as it were, will say "Well, theoretically such and such should be true." They are not using the word in the same way that most scientists do.

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline  
Old May 1st 2018, 01:01 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Somerset, England
Posts: 964
Can you explain the difference between your answer of A and the definition of theoretical physics?
Not possible at the moment.

You introduced the numerical probability of 1.

But you failed to state which definition of probability you are referring to making your question meaningless without it.

I am assuming of course you properly understand at least elementary probability since you introduced it.
studiot is offline  
Old May 1st 2018, 01:18 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 521
It actually runs counter to the whole ethos of scientific philosophy to ever claim to be 100% certain of anything!

It is the rejection of certainty that drives scientific progress.
topsquark likes this.
__________________
~\o/~
Woody is offline  
Old May 1st 2018, 02:18 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Somerset, England
Posts: 964
Originally Posted by Woody View Post
It actually runs counter to the whole ethos of scientific philosophy to ever claim to be 100% certain of anything!

It is the rejection of certainty that drives scientific progress.
Hi Woody,

Whilst I sympathise with the sentiment,

What odds would Ladbrokes give you if you went in to place a bet that RedRum would not win the 2019 Grand National?

Probability is complicated and the probabilities of 1 and 0 are special.
studiot is offline  
Old May 1st 2018, 04:48 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 521
Hi Studiot,
I completely agree.

I should have made it clear that was pointing my comments at the earlier posts in this thread (rather than at your more recent posts).
In particular I was aiming at LoveBunny's "Slam Dunk" post.

It is a typical argument, of people who wish to attack science, to point out that it is "only a theory" and "even the scientists are not 100% sure".

I was trying to indicate how totally specious that argument actually is.
__________________
~\o/~
Woody is offline  
Old May 1st 2018, 06:16 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 191
Originally Posted by lovebunny View Post
QM wave packets and Planck energy element (hv). Also, I have a question. How certain are you of theoretical and experimental physics?

A. 100% certain (without a doubt--->SLAM DUNK).
B. Almost 100% certain
Typically, we use "Will you bet your Mars bar on it?". One does not go around betting Mars bars willy nilly!
topsquark likes this.
benit13 is offline  
Old May 2nd 2018, 01:38 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 521
For those of you, from other countries, who might not be familiar with Mars bars,
These are chocolate and caramel confections much beloved by Glaswegians.
topsquark and benit13 like this.
__________________
~\o/~
Woody is offline  
Closed Thread

  Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

Tags
atomic, mechanics, orbitals, quantum



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is a measurement in quantum mechanics? Pmb Philosophy of Physics 6 Aug 31st 2017 04:50 PM
Atomic orbitals Manas Atomic and Solid State Physics 3 Jan 5th 2011 04:35 PM
Quantum Mechanics Book or DVD p75213 Quantum Physics 0 Nov 1st 2010 06:30 AM
Momentum in quantum mechanics Pmb Quantum Physics 14 Dec 9th 2009 09:08 AM
Quantum Atomic structure questions acropolen Quantum Physics 0 Mar 8th 2009 06:09 PM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed