![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gusluncritically philosophizing:
* Physics is hard to learn.
* Therefore, the collection of physics theories contains a lot of information.
* Therefore, there must a lot of experimental data to account for, otherwise such complex theories would not be warranted. (What's the relationship between the information content of data observed (theory-relevant information, excluding noise) and the information content of the theory)
criticism:
Problems: physics could be hard to learn due to a priori knowledge (mathematics contains very little information, and yet it is hard)
Is physics hard in the same way that math is hard?
* Physics is hard to learn.
* Therefore, the collection of physics theories contains a lot of information.
* Therefore, there must a lot of experimental data to account for, otherwise such complex theories would not be warranted. (What's the relationship between the information content of data observed (theory-relevant information, excluding noise) and the information content of the theory)
criticism:
Problems: physics could be hard to learn due to a priori knowledge (mathematics contains very little information, and yet it is hard)
Is physics hard in the same way that math is hard?