View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 26-May-2008, 03:31 AM
Ken G's Avatar
Ken G Ken G is offline
Order of Kilopi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 12,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papageno View Post
It can be well argued that the greatest achievement, the what-would-you-take-on-a-desert-island piece of information about Physics, is the understanding that a physical system behaves differently depending the scale (length, time, energy, etc.).
Yes, I agree that is a biggie. Probably the balancing point to also take along is the "correspondence principle", which basically says that a law that works on one scale should not contradict a larger scale made up of many copies of the smaller scale version. However, even the correspondence principle has a big flaw-- the possibility of "emergent physics" that is not exactly contradicted by the smaller-scale law, but doesn't result from it either. Emergent behavior is often fairly insensitive to details at smaller scales, it is really a new thing appearing on a larger scale. A brain might be a good example. So I would claim that no "theory of everything" will be remotely close to living up to its billing, given that it will give essentially zero insight into what a brain is.
__________________
Logic is the grammar of truth.

Meaning and absolute certainty are incompatible, and profound meaning and absolute certainty are profoundly incompatible.

The only thing intelligence is capable of is recognizing itself.