- #1
Delong
- 400
- 17
These are two rather unrelated questions but I am curious.
1. How much does physics rely on engineering? I think it's pretty clear that modern engineering relies pretty heavily on physics. Without it we wouldn't have electicity, chemicals, or even know the amount of force and heat we are using. But how much does physics rely on engineering? It's true that without machines we couldn't run particle tests and colliders and without observatories we couldn't see into space. But are those exceptions? Or are all the advances in modern physics dependent on upcoming technology?
2. Why is turbulence so mysterious? I have read Werner Heisenberg say "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." and Horace Lamb, a mathematician, say "I am an old man now, and when I die and go to heaven there are two matters on which I hope for enlightenment. One is quantum electrodynamics, and the other is the turbulent motion of fluids. And about the former I am rather optimistic."
Is turbulence just one example of how we have a very good understanding of physics concepts but not so much of mathematical physics concepts that explain medium scale occurences like turbulence?
1. How much does physics rely on engineering? I think it's pretty clear that modern engineering relies pretty heavily on physics. Without it we wouldn't have electicity, chemicals, or even know the amount of force and heat we are using. But how much does physics rely on engineering? It's true that without machines we couldn't run particle tests and colliders and without observatories we couldn't see into space. But are those exceptions? Or are all the advances in modern physics dependent on upcoming technology?
2. Why is turbulence so mysterious? I have read Werner Heisenberg say "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." and Horace Lamb, a mathematician, say "I am an old man now, and when I die and go to heaven there are two matters on which I hope for enlightenment. One is quantum electrodynamics, and the other is the turbulent motion of fluids. And about the former I am rather optimistic."
Is turbulence just one example of how we have a very good understanding of physics concepts but not so much of mathematical physics concepts that explain medium scale occurences like turbulence?