Why are people so late to become interested in Physics?

Forums such as this seem to attract lots of 18-50yr olds who suddenly become interested in theoretical physics. Now I think this is great - I like the idea of more people interested in physics!

What I do find strange is that why everyone's only interested in all the new, fancy stuff! Personally, I think there are lots of areas of Newtonian physics that are really interesting, and what's more: they're a million, zillion times more accessible! Why is it that people don't care so much about these things? One could argue that Newtonian physics should be more interesting, as it deals with the things we observe on a day to day basis. I don't happen to notice the precession of mercury all that much, or quantum tunneling in my PC! However, I do see waves approaching a beach, balls rolling down hills, tennis balls thrown through the air... why don't people want to understand those things?

No disrespect to the modern greats of physics, but I would go as far to say that all achievements within the subject have not yet matched what Newton's Principia did for physics as we know it.

I think this is quite an interesting predicament, and I'd genuinely like to hear peoples' thoughts on the matter.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In my opinion, physics is actually a growing interest, which seems to be a discipline that is more interesting to individuals as time goes on and progresses. Now this is a good thing, and i profess a prophecy which physics will become a main interest within individuals within te next decade. The reason why, or at least one of the reasons why, is because the more time progresses, science is becoming more fasionable. However, i don't think this thread belongs here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'd like to think interest in physics is growing, but current studies show less and less people are studying it at University. Mods, if this is in the wrong forum then please accept my most humble apologies and feel free to move the thread wherever is most appropriate.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think it might be the nature of the human race, dying to know the grand answer. We have subliminally become scientists, even without knowing the difference of the photon to a gluon?

 

Well, maybe it is because such events are familiar that people do not have the need to understand them. Since they've arrived at an intuitive understanding, they don't feel the need to supplement it with a more formal treatment. Now, quantum and relativity theory has an inate sexiness that (say) classical mechanics does not, exactly because it can describe events that are (almost) wholly foreign to our everyday existence. Because we do not see tunneling, or gravitational lensing, or compact extra dimensions, the more advanced topics hold more appeal.

Example: Even if it wasn't related to my own research, I would probably still find quantum computing fascinating, and almost all that fascination comes from the fact that it really upsets what I know about classical computing.

 

I'd think with the series Cosmos by Carl Sagan many people were introduced into the scientific world by his great way of explaining what it was about in a easy to understand format. That one series opened allot of peoples eyes to things never before known by them in an interesting, informative style. Since then other TV series have come along and explored the Physics world even more which has drawn more people into the scientific realm of wonderment and exploration.

 

Its dull so it was left to the last.

 

Oh come on. How can you have your pudding if you haven't had your meat?

(Google it if you don't know...)

 

It's because it's only now that we've realized, far from being the hapless, harmless geeks we'd always assumed you were, you might kill us all with your stupid particle accelerators and your relentless search for "stuff we can't see that goes even faster than other stuff we can't see".

For God's sake, it's only a TV show, you know.

 

Physics is much like how a city's horizon line looks. In current physics you only see the buildings that currently exist and perhaps the ones that stood the tests of time, in historical physics you would see a history of buildings being erected/bulldozed/raised etc.

Obviously in education you should know the foundations on what things are built, but since to most Theoretical physics is a trivial pastime at best, then it's likely only the relevant/current physics is going to be looked at. Of course this is where you then look to analogies of Rabbit holes and how far you are willing to travel down.

 

I'd certainly agree about all the documentaries on physics being about the new stuff. It occurred to me that with all the new physics, you can do a lot of interesting talking without any details - I assume people like this. One of the downsides of the Newtonian stuff would be that (in my eyes) the interesting bits come after working through the details. One example might be that the wake a ship/duck/speed boat makes always has the same semi-angle. Just saying it isn't all that interesting, but going through all the details and then finding that conclusion might be.

Oh well!

 

I always eat dessert first.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Who cares about physics? Electronics and the internet would have magically evolved all by themselves even without our help, and we'd all be here chatting about it regardless.

 

Mmmmm ...chocolate ...

 

I've always been interested in physics. I even studied it for three semester in college, until I realized I was nowhere near up to the task (at least at that point in my life). However, I was interested in physics only because it could tell us something about why the universe exists. Newtonian physics has been superceded by later theories in explaining the existence of the universe. That's primarily why I am more interested in the newest theories, as the older theories cannot provide any further insight into this question.

 

This only really holds any brunt if you're in a position to use Newtonian physics in a meaningful manner though. If you'd been doing so for years and decided "these results just aren't accurate enough: I need a theory which gives more realistic results" then fine. But if you're unable to do Newtonian physics, what difference does it make to you if another more complicated theory is available?

I guess it just seems strange to me that people want to run before they can walk!

 

Theoretical physics has no practical value to most people. Nor does Newtonian physics. People aren't interested in applying physics. They are interested in what physics has to say about the nature of the universe. People are looking for end results or executive summaries, not actual applied knowledge. Who wants to watch endless football training camps? We just want to see the Super Bowl.

 

I'll agree BUT I'd think that many people are curious about it if they are explained about it in ways which they can undestand, as Carl Sagan did.

 

Well sorry to burst your bubble, but the Super Bowl of physics isn't something you can understand until you've watched and participated in the training camps. Clearly you came here with the beer, popcorn and cheeze whiz and were hoping for a good show, but there's no show here, only a load of hard work before the rewards start coming in.

Regardless, in general, I like how all sorts of people are now coming in from the outside. I especially like those who seek to draw a spiritual connection between physics and their personal religious beliefs, because if I don't make it in physics, these folks will be my future cash cow.

 

I don't know about that. People seem to want to know lots of the whys and hows.