Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: opportunity on 02/11/2018 11:09:17
-
The elephant in the room when it comes to physics looking for life on other planets and piecing that all together, not to mention a post asking if science could be a faith.
-
What "achievement" in physics would it take for it to become a "life science".
Or, are we not thinking about this the right way?
Do we need a biologist, a medic, a philosopher maybe, to bridge that gap?
-
Biology is a subset of physics: biological processes can be described in terms of physics, but physics is not always about biology. So physics isn't a life science because it's "too big" to be one.
-
Big.
Like the elephant in the room.
There are "big" that no one wants the fail.....like the opportunity the US had to develop a stable global economy.
How do you define "big"?
How about I say "big" is the kind of stuff the world is use to by now?
Who would promote "big" in a way the world can't handle?
-
I was being metaphorical. Physics already deals with the life sciences but it also deals with non-life sciences. It is "bigger" than biology in the sense that it contains both biology and sciences that are not biology.
-
I'm sure the world uses metaphors to get along, right?
Probably does...thank God for that.
-
Explain to me the future of science in the absence of the Disney channel.
-
Explain to me the future of science in the absence of the Disney channel.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
-
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Maybe opportunity is talking about philosophy or maybe putting aside life sciences perhaps he is talking about physical science. Physical science is divided into branches, including physics, chemistry, astronomy and earth science. Only opportunity knows what he means by natural science maybe this link may help him focus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_science According to the link Physics is already a life science.
-
Yes, the link is correct, yet in this forum the determination between life and physical sciences is a little different. That's fine.
As re. my comment about the Disney channel, there's a "lot" of material in the "media" about how the stars behave, what exoplanets look like, and so on. Some of the time these documentaries never explicitly say that they are animations, leading non-scientists to consider such is in fact what telescopes can see. I saw one description re. a pulsar and black hole that completely broke a number of fundamental concepts of science, such as breaking the speed of light. I think that type of presentation of physics is misleading to the public.