• BakerBagel
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    So it works fine on human scales, but for most of the universe it is inadequate. That means it’s wrong. Quantum physics and relativity are also wrong since he are unable to reconcile the two, despite them both being the best models we have for their respective scales. We have known for the past century that we have only just begun to understand the universe, and that all our models are irreconcilable with each other, meaning that they are ultimately wrong.

    Just because a model is useful doesn’t mean it is right.

    • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I agree with the essence of your point but personally I’d never use the word “wrong”, only incomplete. Seems weird to call Newton’s laws “wrong” when the only reason that we are willing to accept GR is that it reduces to Newton.

        • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I prefer mine:

          literally every model is a metaphor and not a true representation of the actual phenomenon it’s modeling.

            • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I personally think that “all models are wrong” does nothing to stop people from simply thinking in terms of practical inevitabilities, when it’s actually extremely important to understand that figuring out what’s “actually going on” was never even the concern of science in the first place.

      • Hugin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s not so much that it reduces to Newtonian predictions but that at human scale and energy levels the difference between Newtonian and general relatively is so small it’s almost impossible to tell the difference.

        • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          What you’re describing is literally what it means for general relativity to reduce to Newtonian mechanics. You can literally derive Newton’s equations by applying calculus to general relativity. In fact, if you ever get a physics degree, you’ll have to learn how to do it.

    • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s inaccurate, not wrong. Framing things in right and wrong misrepresents scientific progress in a way that leads to ridiculous conclusions like some post-modernist post-truth philosophers came up with.

    • egerlach@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      In fact, Lord Rutherford said that “ALL models are wrong, but some are useful” 🙂

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        While we’re talking about scientific nobility…

        “In science there is only physics; all the rest is stamp collecting.”

        – Lord Kelvin