My favorite modern day physicist, Lisa Randall, notes:
“The paradox scientists have to contend with is that
while aiming for permanence, we often investigate ideas that experimental data
or better understanding will force us to modify or discard. The sound core of
knowledge that has been tested and relied on is always surrounded by an
amorphous boundary of uncertainties that are the domain of current research.
The ideas and suggestions that excite us today will soon be forgotten if they
are invalidated by more persuasive or comprehensive experimental work tomorrow”.
More insights from Lisa Randall:
“The notion of effective theory is a valuable concept
when we ask how scientific theories advance and what we mean when we say
something is right or wrong. Newton’s Laws work extremely well. They suffice to
send a satellite to the far reaches of the solar system and to construct a
bridge that won’t collapse.
Yet we know that quantum mechanics and relativity
underlie Newton’s descriptions. Newton’s Laws are approximations that suffice
in the effective theory for objects with low enough speeds or of sufficiently
large size. Only when we need to know more about the object’s fundamental
nature do we have to change our description.
This notion of effective theory extends beyond the
realm of science. It is how we approach the world in all its aspects. We can’t
possibly keep track of all information simultaneously. We use a map that has
the scale we need. It’s pointless to know all the small streets around you when
you’re barreling down a highway.
The effective-theory idea is practical and valuable,
but we should also be wary: It can sometimes make us miss things in the
world—and in science. Effective theory concerns what is most obvious to us, but
beyond that might lie the more fundamental truth. Recognizing the effective
theory’s limitations to get outside our comfort zone is what we strive to do—and
what ultimately leads to progress.”.
