Yes but it requires a non trivial understanding of the conflict in the foundatio

Yes but it requires a non trivial understanding of the conflict in the foundations of mathematics, and the subsequent movements in related fields – even philosophy.

Simple version: time and space are measurements (ideal, mathematical), probabilities are measurements (ideal, mathematical), infinities can’t exist, but are an artifact of mathematical grammar caused by scale independence (ideal, mathematical). In other words, while Descartes rescued western mathematics by returning it to the greek science of measurement, cantor, bohr, einstein re-platonized it equating it with language again (as the middle east had done with algebra for example).

This affected every field. It affected physics the most by making it non-physical. And this is important. Because the information present in a physical theory creates greater opportunity for deduction and induction and even abduction than does an ideal theory – something which has been overwhelmingly demonstrated by the failures in physics over the past half century.

I’m increasingly concerned that the next ‘scientific revolution’ will require a lot of tombstones in physics.

Reply addressees: @vertetluisant @charlesmurray