It is difficult to distinguish between physics and "irrational nonsense"

Text ｜ Wuyishan

In August, the US Viking Press published the book of Sabine Hossenfelder, a researcher at the Frankfurt High Research Institute in Germany, EXISTISTIAL PHYSICS: A Scientists Biggest Questions (translated by the author of this article "The author of theory: Physics: Physics: A scientist for the most huge question of life "). The book examines a series of problems facing humans.

Lost in Math, the first book published in Holsonfield in 2018: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray There are not many associated theories. In this book, in her second book, she set her sharp vision to some popular beliefs.

Holsonfield believes that unlike other disciplines, physics raises some profound problems in the meaning of all things (including life and death, the origin of the universe, real nature, etc.). Following similar issues are religious leaders, philosophers, Guru (psychiatrist), mysteriousists, alternative therapists, and some permanent mediocre doctors. Unlike the popular science writers who only focus on condemning pseudo -science, she wants to point out that in fact, many spiritual concepts are not contradictory with modern physics.

In Hosonfield's view, the following phenomenon is not accidental. For example, alternative therapists like to use quantum entanglement and vacuum to explain the effects of their therapies; based on quantum mechanics, some people believe that their death grandmother is still alive, and so on.

The origin of science and religion is the same. So far, both sides have to answer some of the same questions: Where do we come from? Where will we go? How much can we know? The subject closest to answering such questions is physics.

The author said that the laws of nature are contradictory with other rules, but some things are indifferent scientific and unscientific, that is, they are not right or wrong, they are "indispensable." She wrote: "Science has nothing to say about this. At least, the current state science has nothing to say about this."

The author pointed out that we can't explain the origin of the universe now, and it is difficult to say whether we can finally explain it. Such as "the universe in the particles", "particles are conscious", "our universe is computer simulation", etc., all are not scientific and unscientific. Moreover, the "universe itself is conscious". It is difficult to completely exclude it.

Some stylish faiths make people know less about physics, and the more they feel charm. To demonstrate related issues, Holsonfield tried to avoid pulling into celebrities as much as possible (although she occasionally mentioned the actor Dibak Jobla and inventor Elon Musk), would rather interview physics colleagues (including Nobelle, including Nobelkel Award winner) and discuss the debate with it.

The book split the "net" very well, research and discuss many themes: God and spirituality, free will, universe consciousness, mind body dual theory, big bang theory about the origin of the universe, the possibility of parallel universe, whether we live in a computer Simten to the world (simulated hypothesis), and so on. The author admits that the simulation hypothesis makes her "very unhappy", because the hypothesis that the bold view of the natural law has "ignored" our existing understanding of the laws of nature.

The author of the book says that for hundreds of years, philosophers have been busy distinguishing from irrational nonsense. But to this day, nonsense things are still popular. However, if the reader wants to know how to distinguish the good interpretation and the bad explanation, there are at least two good books to refer to it now. One is the The Beginning of Infinity of David Deutsch The Source ", People's Post and Telecommunications Publishing House, published in 2014), the second is the new book of Holsonfield.

The content of this book is mainly: "Does the past still exist?" "How did the universe start, how will it end?" "Why can no one live and be younger?" "Are you just a bag of atoms?" "Is physics excluded the free will?" "Is the universe created for us?" "Will the universe think?" "Is it predictable?" "What is the purpose of all things? "

"China Science News" (2022-09-09 The 3rd edition of the original title is "How to distinguish whether it is physics or" irrational nonsense ""))

Edit | Li Yun

Capture | Zhihai

Please press the QR code below for 3 seconds to identify

- END -