Can philosophy of science have an impact on physics? | Sabine Hossenfelder

Interview with Sabine Hossenfelder discussing creativity in physics, physics and philosophy of science, new developments in cosmology, and more.

00:00 Do you have a feeling of awe and admiration towards the universe?
01:37 Is there a place for creativity in physics?
03:36 Is it misguided to look for simplicity and singularity in physics?
06:11 Do you think science will be able to accommodate human subjectivity?
07:40 Do you think philosophy of science can have an impact on physics?
11:11 How has philosophy influenced your work as a physicist?
12:09 Are there exciting recent developments in cosmology?
13:30 What is the best medium to communicate science ideas to the public?
15:03 What are you currently working on?
15:52 What is the biggest question on the intersection between physics and philosophy?

In this interview, leading physicist and author, Sabine Hossenfelder, discusses the relationship between physics and philosophy. She examines the scientific community’s desire to find a unified theory of everything, and contemplates how science can accommodate human subjectivity. She also considers the role of physics in helping us tackle major philosophical issues involving time, free will, and consciousness.

#SabineHossenfelder #PhilosophyOfScienceAndPhysics #TheoreticalPhysicistInterview

Sabine Hossenfelder is a theoretical physicist who specialises in the foundations of physics. She is a Research Fellow at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies where she leads the group on Superfluid Dark Matter. She is the author of Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray, and the forthcoming Existential Physics: A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions. Hossenfelder also has a popular YouTube channel called "Science without the gobbledygook".

The Institute of Art and Ideas features videos and articles from cutting edge thinkers discussing the ideas that are shaping the world, from metaphysics to string theory, technology to democracy, aesthetics to genetics. Subscribe today!

[TheInstituteOfArtAndIdeas]

What did you think fo this interview? Do you agree with Sabine Hossenfelder? Leave a comment below!

[woufff_]

Sabine is a very inspiring person and I am full of admiration about the way she arrives to transmit complicated stuff in a easy and simple way on her own channel. Thank you for this video <3

[maudiojunky]

I agree a lot with Sabine here. I'm an engineer, but I also studied philosophy and psychology, and both have proven very helpful to me as an engineer. Philosophy essentially teaches you how to evaluate abstract concepts which have no yes/no right/wrong answer and apply logic to these situations, as well as establish a framework for what constitutes knowledge and how people approach problems based on their theory of knowledge. Psychology has similar benefits in terms of understanding others' viewpoints and why they do the things they do. Being aware of human frameworks and limitations, being taught to question the foundations of knowledge, and being taught to formalize complex, abstract problems are all useful for scientists and engineers.

[wade]

I love Sabine! I hope to see more and more of her.

[slgnssp]

I've recently read a book on AI from the 70s, written by mathematicians, and they criticize physicist for viewing "more accurate" as always strictly superior to "more understandable" (which is not necessarily the same as simpler). The discussion on how philosophy can impact physics reminded me of that, even though it's not the same point being made.

[pappapata]

So I am in the company of Sabine again ... and she is clear, distinct and to me she shines like the sunflowers of the decor.❤

[l.m.]

I see Sabine doing a great job of pushing the boundaries of science. Being critical of the status quo is something most scientists will not do. She is a brave soul, in my mind, capable of understanding the conceptual dynamics and voicing concerns without the trappings of emotional overtones. Pushing the limits of what we know sometimes involves questioning what we know.

[thgeremilrivera-thorsen]

The more I watch and listen to Sabine, the more my respect for her grows, both as a physicist and a general thinker.

[hyrocoaster]

Sabine Hossenfelder, you've just become my home of ontological security. Thanks for this interview

[josephtangredi]

Would like to hear Dr. Hossenfelder have a discussion/debate with Dr. Sean Carroll. Both are brilliant. I understand they are friends, but they differ quite a bit on theory. Dr. Carroll will be teaching Philosophy of Physics soon on the faculty at Johns Hopkins.

[Thomas-gk]

Sabine is one of the smartest, bravest, most trustworthy and soulful scientists, humanity can count on currently. Thanks for this insight in her thinking.

[seeyoucu]

Definitely admire Sabine. It's great to see someone that can make science legible and have a decent amount of people listen. It gives me hope.

[nly]

Cant wait to read her new book she mentions coming out this summer about the intersection between philosophy and the foundations of physics!

[simonreij]

excellent questions thankyou, I have followed sabine for a few years

[jonbarnard]

Nice interview. Sabine is one of the most interesting educators on Youtube. I always enjoy watching her. She's always got something interesting to say.

[christopherellis]

Have been subscribed to SH for quite a while. Love how she pokes at the holes in the various hypotheses.

[olbluelips]

I really respect Sabine for this! Just because she's very skeptical and down to earth doesn't mean she doesn't recognize the value of philosophy.

Some people seem to outright dismiss any aspect of reality not discoverable by the scientific method as religious, simply unknowable, dishonest, etc

[TheMg]

Good interview and discussion. I like the way Sabine Hossenfelder phrases most of the stuff she says. My take on the title question is that there's a necessary philosophical component to physics which necessarily impacts physics. Then there's the philosophy of science, which is a separate field, and which is not necessarily, or very often, impactful. The idea that time is an illusion is one of the least interesting philosophical views, imho. Good channel. Thanks

[frankrosenbloom]

Honestly, I am in love with this amazing woman and my wife of 39 years completely understands :)

[vladimirrogozhin]

Many thanks! An extremely important topic and interesting discussion for an open global brainstorm.
John A. Wheeler:
*_"Philosophy is too important to be left to philosophers."_*
*_"We are no longer satisfied with understanding only particles, force fields, geometry, or even time and space. Today we require physics to have some understanding of existence itself."_*
Carlo Rovelli in *_"Physics Needs Philosophy / Philosophy Needs Physics"_* (2017), in which he also outlined a list of issues and topics currently being discussed in theoretical physics. It can be seen that most of the questions relate to the sphere of philosophical ontology. And this list is not complete. The first question on the list is "What is space?" Second: "What is time?"...
Today, fundamental science (mathematics, physics, cosmology) is experiencing an acute conceptual-paradigmatic crisis in the metaphysical/ontological basis, manifested as a “crisis of understanding” (J. Horgan “The End of Science”, Kopeikin K.V. “Souls” of atoms and “ atoms” of the soul: Wolfgang Ernst Pauli, Carl Gustav Jung and “three great problems of physics”), “crisis of interpretation and representation” (Romanovskaya T.B. “Modern physics” and contemporary art - parallels of style”), “loss of certainty” (Kline M “Mathematics: Loss of Certainty”, D. Zaitsev “Truth, Consequence and Modern Logic”), “trouble with physics” (Lee Smolin “The Trouble” with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next”). Fundamental science "rested" in the understanding of space and matter (ontological structure), the nature of the "laws of nature", the nature of "fundamental constants", the nature of the phenomena of time, number, information, consciousness.

It's time to realize that Quantum theory and General relativity are phenomenological (parametric, operationalist. "effective") theories without ontological justification / substantiation (ontological basification). Also, String Theory is a theory without ontological justification. There is no basic ontologically based structure.
A theory that claims to be “fundamental” must be an ontologically based theory.
To achieve a breakthrough and overcome the conceptual-paradigmatic crisis in the foundations of fundamental science, a new comprehensive ontological basis of knowledge and cognition is needed.

To understand the "EXISTENCE itself" means to "grasp" (understand) the nature of the primordial TENSION of the Cosmos, to understand the nature of space and time. And for this it is necessary to "grasp" the primordial generating structure of matter - *"La Structure Mère" (Ontological SuperStructure=Ontological Causal Primary Structure)* . That is, to build a model of the metaphysical triad We need breakthrough dialectical and ontological ideas, a methodology for dialectical-ontological construction of the basis of knowledge, and not just mathematics and physics. It is necessary to build a new EXTENDED BASIS of knowledge and cognition in general - a new EXTENDED IDEALITY. Here we need DIALECTICAL ONTOLOGIC.

G. Hegel: “The truth of space and time is matter.”
The paradigm of the Universe as an eternal holistic generating process (the "PARADIGM OF UNDERSTANDING") gives a new look at matter and space. MATTER is what all meanings, forms and structures are born from. SPACE is an ideal entity, an ideal limit for states of matter. The ontological structure of space (absolute, ontological, existential) is rigidly connected with the absolute forms of existence of matter (absolute states). And there are three and only three of these states: absolute rest (linear state, absolute Continuum, ideal image, shape - "cube", "Cartesian box") + absolute motion (vortex, cyclic, absolute Discretuum, ideal image, shape - "sphere") and their synthesis - absolute becoming (wave, absolute wave, absolute DisContinuum, ideal image, shape - "cylinder"). What is especially important: each absolute form of existence of matter has its own ONTOLOGICAL PATH (the bivector of the absolute state). Accordingly, SPACE (absolute, ontological, existential) has three ontological dimensions / 9 gnoseological dimensions: three “linear” + three “vortex” + three “wave”. But we must "dig" deeper into ontology in order to “comprehend” the meta—phenomenon - the ONTOLOGICAL (structural, cosmic) MEMORY, the “soul of matter”, its measure. Ontological (structural, cosmic) memory is that "NOTHING " that holds, preserves, develops and directs matter (entelechy, nous, Aristotle's "mind-prime mover").
To understand SPACE and TIME, we must move from the physicalist concept, the simple ideality of “SPACE-TIME”, to the ontological concept of “SPACE-MATTER/MEMORY-TIME". That is, to generating process with memory.
TIME (ontological) is a polyvalent phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory, which substantiates the quantitative certainty of the existence of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating meanings, forms and structures. Time (ontological) is the dialectic of the generation of number and meaning. Ontological time = cyclic ("horizontal" of being of the Universe) + wave (emergent, time of becoming of the generating structure) + linear ("vertical" of being, hierarchical time). The birth of the "arrow of time" is the birth of light. Gnoseological time ("human-dimensional") - past, present, future. Information is a polyvalent phenomenon of ontological (structural, cosmic) memory which substantiates the certainty, orderliness, essential / substantive unity of the Universe as an eternal holistic process of generating more and more new meanings, forms and structures.