Axiomatize Physics

[Anonymous No.12238082]

LETS FUCKING GOOOO FAGGOTS. LETS FUCKING DO THIS FUCK YEAA YEAAA YEAAAAAAAA.
>this ain't no joke lets go fuckers

[Anonymous No.12238107]

I feel like statistical mechanics is a good place to start, we already have axiomatized probability theory so we can maybe start with boltzman distribuitions and go from there until we can develop the concept of temperature, by then we will already have developed a set of axioms for collections of particles with a set size, then we'll just have to fit bits and pieces until we get to the already established axioms in qm.

However, I've got no fucking clue how to fit relativity in the whole picture since all that shit's pretty negligible on small scales, lets go bros we can do this lets go lets go faggots

[Anonymous No.12238338]

>>12238082
>axiomatizing an empirical field

[Anonymous No.12238361]

>>12238082
There's already the Wightman's axiom on QFT, but it doesn't reflect physicist's view on QFT now.

[Anonymous No.12238574]

>the proof is left to god

[Anonymous No.12238601]

love is the only axiom you need

[Anonymous No.12238628]

>>12238601
based

[Anonymous No.12238644]

>>12238082
>LETS FUCKING GOOOO
ok nigga where

[Anonymous No.12239750]

>>12238644
Well it would be nice if someone could contribute to the discussion

[Anonymous No.12239780]

>>12239750
well then suggest something that can be considered an axiome in physics, oh wait, you fucking cant.

[Anonymous No.12239877]

>>12238574
Based
I really want to try writing that next down the professor tries to push everything he couldn't do in the lecture onto the homework to derive for yourself.

[Anonymous No.12239935]

What about the conservation of energy as an axiom?

t. not a physicist

[Anonymous No.12239991]

>>12239935
>What about the conservation of energy as an axiom?
Energy isn't conserved in general. For example in general relativity or in open systems.

[Anonymous No.12240051]

>>12239877
My undergrad calc prof used to do this all the time and for the first few lectures I used to actually do them expecting he would take them up next class, quickly realized what really happened is he had dug himself a hole and didn't feel like being wrong in front of the class so he'd babble something about it being trivial and you should figure it out on your own time. Bunch of fucking nonsense.

[Anonymous No.12240495]

>>12239780
The least action principle holds up pretty well applied to any current model

[Anonymous No.12240511]

>>12240495
The thing with physics is that its all bits and pieces because of the shit ton of approximations me make which change in every branch, while an electron's charge is negligible in a classical mechanics problem it's crucial in E&M. I think we must first axiomatize classical physics and both g/s relativity, we might be able to tie up the ends with qft. While this wouldn't be a toe, it could very well become a sensible way to approach any and all physical models

[Based Negroid No.12240515]

>>12238644
in your mom

[Anonymous No.12240560]

>>12239780
Physics is what we use to describe reality. There's not just one set of axioms, people actually propose different set of axioms to describe their observations of reality, some clashing with others.
One widely accepted axiom is that spacetime exists, that is, 4 dimensions seem to exist.

[Anonymous No.12240919]

>>12238082
>Axiomise a fractal whose pattern isn't deterministic

Based retard.

[Anonymous No.12241636]

>>12238338
this

[Anonymous No.12241641]

>>12238601
this

.t PhD in physics (with a minor in love)

[Anonymous No.12242905]

>>12240919
>axiomatize a fractal whose pattern isn't deterministic

Fucking seethe, it not like you can't establish basic underlying all encompassing axioms that can say shit about how it could evolve in time

>>12241641
Incredibly based and love pilled

[Anonymous No.12242962]

>>12238082
This is Hilbert's sixth problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_sixth_problem

2018 Theme issue on ‘Hilbert's sixth problem’: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/toc/rsta/376/2118

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wightman_axioms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_quantum_field_theory

[Anonymous No.12243041]

>>12242905
>it not like you can't establish basic underlying all encompassing axioms

Please, do go on.

[Anonymous No.12243086]

>>12238082
How about this as a start?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twistor_theory#:~:text=In%20theoretical%20physics%2C%20twistor%20theory,space-time%20itself%20should%20emerge.

[Anonymous No.12243526]

>>12238082
Isn't that like field theory or something?

[Anonymous No.12245288]

is the axiom of statistical thermodynamics that all microstates are equally likely valid?