On Physicists (1980-1989)

"The prevailing trend in modern physics is thus much against any sort of view giving primacy to [...] undivided wholeness of flowing movement. Indeed, those aspects of relativity theory and quantum theory which do suggest the need for such a view tend to be de-emphasized and in fact hardly noticed by most physicists, because they are regarded largely as features of the mathematical calculus and not as indications of the real nature of things." (David Bohm, "Wholeness and the Implicate Order?", 1980)

"The physicist […] engages in complex and difficult calculations, involving the manipulating of ideal, mathematical quantities that, at first glance, are wholly lacking in the music of the living world and the beauty of the resplendent cosmos. It would seem as if there exists no relationship between these quantities and reality. Yet these ideal numbers that cannot be grasped by one's senses, these numbers that only are meaningful from within the system itself, only meaningful as part of abstract mathematical functions, symbolize the image of existence. […] As a result of scientific man's creativity there arises an ordered, illumined, determined world, imprinted with the stamp of creative intellect, of pure reason and clear cognition. From the midst of the order and lawfulness we hear a new song, the song of the creature to the Creator, the song of the cosmos to its Maker." (Joseph B Soloveitchik, "Halakhic Man", 1983)

"Until now, physical theories have been regarded as merely models with approximately describe the reality of nature. As the models improve, so the fit between theory and reality gets closer. Some physicists are now claiming that supergravity is the reality, that the model and the real world are in mathematically perfect accord." (Paul C W Davies, "Superforce", 1984)

"It is positively spooky how the physicist finds the mathematician has been there before him or her." (Steven Weinberg, "Lectures on the Applicability of Mathematics" , Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 1986)

"The physicist's problem is the problem of ultimate origins and ultimate natural laws. The biologist's problem is the problem of complexity." (Richard Dawkins, "The Blind Watchmaker", 1986)

"Toward the end of the last century, many physicists felt that the mathematical description of physics was getting ever more complicated. Instead, the mathematics involved has become ever more abstract, rather than more complicated. The mind of God appears to be abstract but not complicated. He also appears to like group theory." (Anthony Zee, "Fearful Symmetry: The Search for Beauty in Modern Physics", 1986)

"Unlike an architect, Nature does not go around expounding on the wondrous symmetries of Her design. Instead, theoretical physicists must deduce them. Some symmetries, such as parity and rotational invariances, are intuitively obvious. We expect Nature to possess these symmetries, and we are shocked if She does not. Other symmetries, such as Lorentz invariance and general covariance, are more subtle and not grounded in our everyday perceptions. But, in any case, in order to find out if Nature employs a certain symmetry, we must compare the implications of the symmetry with observation." (Anthony Zee, "Fearful Symmetry: The Search for Beauty in Modern Physics", 1986)

"Where chaos begins, classical science stops. For as long as the world has had physicists inquiring into the laws of nature, it has suffered a special ignorance about disorder in the atmosphere, in the fluctuations of the wildlife populations, in the oscillations of the heart and the brain. The irregular side of nature, the discontinuous and erratic side these have been puzzles to science, or worse, monstrosities." (James Gleick, "Chaos", 1987)

"Physicists are all too apt to look for the wrong sorts of generalizations, to concoct theoretical models that are too neat, too powerful, and too clean. Not surprisingly, these seldom fit well with data. To produce a really good biological theory, one must try to see through the clutter produced by evolution to the basic mechanisms. What seems to physicists to be a hopelessly complicated process may have been what nature found simplest, because nature could build on what was already there." (Francis H C Crick, "What Mad Pursuit?: A Personal View of Scientific Discovery", 1988)

"Theoretical physicists are accustomed to living in a world which is removed from tangible objects by two levels of abstraction. From tangible atoms we move by one level of abstraction to invisible fields and particles. A second level of abstraction takes us from fields and particles to the symmetry-groups by which fields and particles are related. The superstring theory takes us beyond symmetry-groups to two further levels of abstraction. The third level of abstraction is the interpretation of symmetry-groups in terms of states in ten-dimensional space-time. The fourth level is the world of the superstrings by whose dynamical behavior the states are defined." (Freeman J Dyson, "Infinite in All Directions", 1988)