/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18748336
All physics is built off assumptions about nature based on observations. The current assumptions are really good, but we still don't have a fully coherent idea of nature. When I studied at the university I found that all the physicists/mathematicians/engineers were solely focused on the extremely advanced parts of math and physics and believed the fundamentals were 100% correct. I think all the inexplicable things we see at the more advanced levels are a result of inaccuracies at the most basic levels. I'd rather have a deeper and deeper understanding of the fundamentals than going into insane complexity within one super niche field. Think about chess. Chess has simple rules that give rise to a whole world of complexity, and there's people who study that complexity on really high levels. But if you were to change one simple rule the whole system of complexity would change. I'm not saying the fundamentals of physics are wrong, but I'm saying there are probably better fundamentals.

You know anything about harmonics/cymatics?