On Some Issues on the Models in Physics

An English narrative version of the author’s paper in Romanian

Essay, 2018
9 Pages, Grade: 2


On Some Issues on the Models in Physics

An English narrative version of the author’s paper in Romanian [1]


In order to have a better perspective on how the models in Physics are changing and to attempt to predict trends of the future changes, a new approach is proposed. An example of using this approach for a particular case is included in a previous publications. This is a trans and interdisciplinary approach and an example of the proposed by the author manner to evaluate the model changes by building spaces of those potential states of those changes (by using the mathematical notions of topological spaces)[2]. This is considered possible because:

- The changes may be considered to take place step by step in many iterations for the same dominant ideas

- The main dominant ideas exist in all steps. Even if they become latent while other ideas become dominant in the scientific environment, they come back very often in new dominant series of changes.

- The approach is based on the following assumptions:

- The models of Physics and their change, especially for the last century for the case of quantum mechanics and relativity theory are examples of amazing switches in the paradigms, which were in most dominant cases, totally unpredicted and unexpected.

- Even if the internal engines of Physics models are mentioned as the driving forces of those changes, there are more diverting from this line opinions, suggesting that:

- It is either possible that those changes are fully random or that.

- There are more complex, unknown so far, driving forces of those changes, which are related to the way the mankind is accumulating knowledge on the universe.

The proposed approach in the paper has the goal to give an answer to this question. The goal is also to switch to a set of approaches looking for a more detailed systematic evaluation of the problems in a given model and tot have the capability to predict the main features of the model that could be the winning one in the competition of better describing new facts (experiments and/or phenomena).


The main starting point of the approach is considering that the changes in the fundamental models in Physics correspond to changes in the adopted paradigms. However, as a more detailed description on how actually the paradigms are changing leads to the need to identify some of the dominant mechanisms defining “the engine” of those changes[3].

It is proposed to consider that the dominant aspects of the changes are the following:

1. The models in Physics are under the sign of certain paradigms. The influence of a paradigm extends over a series of changes dominating the period defined by this paradigm. However, the cause and the trends of the coming change to another paradigm can be found in the paradigm itself. In a previous paper it was shown that this transit takes place from one state to another (from the point of view of dominating types of paradigms) in accordance to a certain matrix of changes. It is important to note that the approach considers that the change cannot be described as a “progress” or “evolution”, but rather as a “simple change”, a “switch from one paradigm to another”. From the point of view of the type of models (and not of the accumulated new knowledge on the studied physical object) they are changing from one state to another. The states of the model changes are dominated by specific features, as it will be described later. The changes and the new models are in tight relationship with the notions that are used in Physics to describe objects from the perspective of this science:

i. Notions as “matter, speed, force” etc. were used with different meaning from one paradigm to another (in Aristotle’s, Galileo’s or Einstein’s Physics) and they depend on the manner they were defined and are accepted as long as they are not conflicting experiments and / or new observations.

ii. This fundamental relationship in Physics, to use as a measure of truth the concordance of the theories and the models built on them with the experiment, measurable objects and/or phenomena, was a guiding scientific principle for all the period from the non- Aristotle’s Physics to the revolution generated by quantum mechanics. Since the time of the works of Galileo and up to the quantum mechanics times the dominating scientific method was based on the Cartesian Discours sur la méthode . Nevertheless, modern Physics in general and Quantum Physics especially set a new paradigm of the scientific approach to build models, which may be formulated as Discours sur la création de la réalité)( as proposed in previous papers[[4] ]).

iii. The intimate driving forces, that solve the cases of apparent (binary) logic inconsistencies from the accumulated knowledge based on some models and their governing paradigms, have in the author’s opinion an internal more profound cause, beyond the notions and methods of Physics. These causes are generated by non-Physics related ideas, concepts, preconcepts etc., coming from general cultural fond and/or other means of perceiving the world (as for instance the artistic one) and are called in this approach “beliefs”. Belief is a notion that is assumed in this paper to be connected with the deep reality perceiving (inherited) matrices of the observers (who may happen to be scientists for instance). The observers of the world (scientists) may not be even aware of that conditioning background information. This is an old dilemma and debate on the independence of a physicist from his psychological, cultural and global society non – science related sources (artistic for instance). In the author’s opinion, even if the scientist takes all the actions he can imagine in order to avoid influence from areas not related to science, as homologated by his/her community, the result is a failure. The impact of this ”syphoning“ of inputs, solutions to solve deep crises in Physics models come from areas like general cultural background. On the other side science itself, Physics in particular, generates, for the duration of validity of a certain paradigm, a set of strong beliefs leading to a kind of “mythological” approach to any topic during that period of domination of that paradigm. This situation induces a continuous potential biases in the knowledge acquisition process, which leads ultimately to high contradictions between theories (and the models they generate) and the facts. For instance the passage from the belief “speed – cause of the movement” to the belief “acceleration cause of the movement” in classical mechanics took place with quite high difficulty and happened only when it was obvious that the experimental data totally contradict the first one. In this case also a major switch in the scientific method took place in Physics, i.e. the switch from the change of the logical (binary) correctness as a proof of the truth to the experiment as the final “judge“ on this. However later experiments / facts became assimilated with reality and observable things/processes ( including the debate what is reality), which is an issue under discussion in this paper. iv. The model change process is dominated by a number of nodes (types of states describing the models). The change from one node/state to another is taking place on a very high number of times and the trace is given by a matrix of changes from one state to another, as described in detail previously5. The matrix has some specific features:

- It is actually distributed on three levels (if considered in a 3D format) and consists of nine steps/elements.

- Every time the model is refined, changed on aspects not annulating it and / or reiterating/confirming models by another research team, the route is passed again and again. The resultant of so many passages performed step by step is a space delineating the framework of the model and describing it from mathematical point of view as a limiting topological space. This is a representation of the acceptable limits (confirmed by Physics to that moment) for a given model. Actually recent Nobel Prizes and other research results show that for more and more objects of study in Physics the topological description is an acceptable one and it is confirmed by experiments. In other words it is more and more recognized that topological features are not only the characteristic of the models, but of the objects themselves.


[1] Serbanescu, D. "Unele Aspecte ale Modelarii in Fizica. Some Aspects of Modeling in Physics" is now online as an ebook and has the following ISBN: 9783668689572, www.grin.com/document/421571

[2] Serbanescu, D., "O perspectivă din interiorul fizicii și energeticii nucleare asupra istoriei acestora, dar mai ales asupra dilemelor lor actuale - Cu accent asupra specificului din România", Symposium: Romanian Academy – 150 years, DLMFS, CRIFST, Bucharest, România, Sept 2016.

[3] Serbanescu, D., "Scientific Knowledge and Mythology", SRA conference Boston, USA, Dec 2008, 10.13140/RG.2.1.2447.7201

[4] Serbanescu, D., "An integrated perspective on knowledge and existence", Noema XVI, iulie 2017, pp 185-216.

Excerpt out of 9 pages


On Some Issues on the Models in Physics
An English narrative version of the author’s paper in Romanian
Catalog Number
ISBN (eBook)
ISBN (Book)
File size
606 KB
some, issues, models, physics, english, romanian
Quote paper
Dan Serbanescu (Author), 2018, On Some Issues on the Models in Physics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/424112


  • No comments yet.
Read the ebook
Title: On Some Issues on the Models in Physics

Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book
- High royalties for the sales
- Completely free - with ISBN
- It only takes five minutes
- Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free