Whew, really fantastic article!

> “In physics, description is explanation” (author quoting his PhD advisor)

Yes, i have always hated this about physics. It is the only scientific field that apparently feels no responsibility to explain “why”, deciding that “what” is sufficient.

I wish the author all success so that i can someday read a satisfying answer to some of the “whys” of physics.

▲

Maxatar 4 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not that physics feels no responsibility to explain why, it's that all other fields of science answer the why by punting to some lower level of science that is taken as an assumption until you get down to physics which has nothing lower level to punt to.

Psychology explains why you feel tired by pointing to biology. Biology explains why cells need ATP by pointing to chemistry. Chemistry explains why ATP releases energy by pointing to physics. Physics explains that by pointing to some higher level form of physics like thermodynamics, which points to statistical mechanics, which point to quantum laws. When you get down to a certain level you simply have nothing left to punt to. You simply accept it because it's what's observed and makes reproducible predictions or you don't and go study philosophy or religion or something.

	▲	ishouldstayaway 11 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Or, as the old joke goes: > Psychology is really biology; biology is really chemistry; chemistry is really physics; physics is really math; and math is really hard.
	▲	lolakutty an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		There is philosophy, but common physicists does not like going there, unless for rare cases like the author or Max Tegmark or Roger Penrose... So they goes round and round, using more and more "dials" to stay within their framework, always kicking the can down the road a bit (its turtles all the way down), but never really answering the core questions...