Re: Is Particle Physics At Risk of Becoming Tautological?

[Daniel Schroeder <DSCHROEDER@CC.WEBER.EDU>]

>    Let me go further out on a philosophic limb. I tend to think of physics
> as an intellectual structure that is isomorphic to empirical reality but not
> the same thing.

Fair enough, but true for all of physics, not just particle physics.

>    Let us stipulate that particle theory is still in some respects
> isomorphic to physical reality. But has it developed too much of an internal
> clockwork mechanism that can actually be verified. Does it now pass the test
> of Okam's razor?

I think of Occam's Razor as a criterion for choosing between two
competing theories, not a simple yes/no criterion that can be
applied to a single theory.

It's inevitable, I think, that as the subject matter of physics extends
further and further from everyday experience, the terms and concepts
seem more and more abstract.  If you consider this to be undesirable,
the solution is to immerse yourself in the subject until the unfamiliar
becomes familiar.  Also, with time, people will develop better ways
of thinking about things and explaining them (I don't mean new theories--
I mean simpler formulations of the same theories).  A hundred years
ago, a lot of physicists complained that atoms were too abstract!

Dan