Carlo Rovelli: "Why Physics needs Philosophy"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лип 2016
- LSE Philosophy Public Lecture | 17 July 2016
Once again, physics is facing foundational questions: What is the nature of time? What is the nature of space? What is the role of the mind in the description of reality? Questions of this sort, argues physicist and best-selling author Carlo Rovelli, cannot be addressed without philosophical awareness.
please point the camera at whats been projected on the wall more
Reading Reality is not what it seems- the journey to Quantum Gravity by Dr. Carlo Rovelli. Thank you for this excellent book Dr. Rovelli! I waited five months for its translation to English.
it's on my Xmas wish list.
Hey! Dan Goodbad, it's Vary Good and if you read his " Seven Lessons In Physics" you'll enjoy this trip!
Thank you for posting! Ignore the complainers-if they really cared they could email for the slides, if they’re so important! Seriously though, this rules.
Those who stand in the forest without seeing the trees don't know what Philosophy is either. The "love of words/wording" is not about an infatuation with titillating novels or fashionable politics, every baby is a scientist who lives by the inseparable mix of environment and culture in "philosophical" dependency.
And if a Physicist says the easiest to fool is yourself, then you can add philosophy and do a thorough job of it, which is why Physicists and Philosophers should check each other's work via the mediation of Mathematicians.
Scientists provide the evidence of working reality via mathematics to philosophers who then can reason from first principles, and provide the postulates for reiterating and refining the collective understanding.
"Unification" leads to the definition of the Quantum Universe, because the act of unifying in constant terms is the origin of all information superimposed in fluid degrees of certainty, "=" symbol is the pivotal function of unity in mathematical formulae, meaning and purpose of the approach to unity is a reasonable and rational connection of philosophy in principle.
"Time-timing" is another version of the basic principle of connection existence, a dynamically fluid state.
Physics observes and codifies evidence of relationships that are unified in principle. It isn't a search for unification or why it is existence, mostly it's a study technique or methodology, of how it becomes technology. The trees in the forest have been identified and arranged in orderly manner, philosophically.
"Solved" specific problems are why philosophy is required to fit the apparent solution back into the whole, because it's part of continuous (unified) evolution.
Very interesting lecture. Living in a world of duality requires polarization of views because it's the methodology used to find optima, but then there's the further optimization for particular environments and the process can never cease.
If bad philosophy is to be avoided, what is politics?
Thank you so much for sharing.
The videographer is terrible; he has no concept of showing the presenter AND what is presented on the projector screen, he mindlessly follows the physicist. This is most important when the voice of the lecturer is hard to understand. For this reason I give this video a 3 on the scale of 1-5.
Peirce ("purse") is commonly mistaken as "Pierce." :)
We create reality. Science and philosophy think they are finding answers to how things are, but they are just creating and/or creatively thinking them.
Dal mio punto di vista il tempo è un ritmo, il ritmo con cui l'universo
si rigenera, così come si rigenera un'immagine telvisiva.
sid maier h
There's nothing here for me to disagree with in principle but I feel that he's merely (re)stating the obvious and he's not exactly done so in the most eloquent way possible (maybe the language barrier has something to do with this). I've seen much better defenses of philosophy's role in science than this talk. Maybe he's written something more cogent on the subject matter, though...
neuralvibes he is repeating himself a lot, my view is that most great minds are very blinkered and tend to have a very reductionist view of other fields, I think many people view Einstein they would have viewed Hume if they had been a few hundred years older, Hume wrote awful books on history. I don't see how relevant any of this is to how things actually happen as far as acquiring knowledge, I think philosophers are feeling left out because modern physics relies on visualisation with maths and not language and physicists spend to much time in a world where the schroedinger equation is an everyday thing
Reading Roveli's book, Reality is not what it seems, I am stuck at how pompous this man is. His take on European history is eccentric. Roveli reckons the Christians burnt all the books, Isis style, but he mentions in his own book that the work of Lucretius was preserved in a Christian abbey, but without batting an eyelid! He also calls Plato stupid for speculating on the Immortality of the soul. It is true that the standard model is triumphant in predictive power and the soul is not there, hence Plato's stupidity. But consciousness is not in the standard model also. But consciousness is obviously primary, as Einstein was conscious before he did his work, and conscious people made all this stuff up but they are left out of their model. Kurt Godel's incompleteness..... lost my line of thought!