Isn't the search for a "general field theory" biased by human POV?

Question

Physicists divide the universe into micro and macro, gravity, magnetism, strong force, weak force. Isn't this division artificial? Imagine a sentient being smaller than a quark or larger than a galaxy. Would this creature categorize these forces in the same way?

Answer 1

Yes, this branch of physics is biased by our place in the universe. It takes the occasional great genius to be able to transcend our physical limitations.

Answer 2

One might consider a "general field theory" in physics the same way one might consider a general practitioner in medicine as opposed to a specialist. Even when one is specializing in a particular branch of the human body, one cannot diagnose a problem that is wholly and completely unrelated to the other specialities that encompass the human body. These divisions are only 'aritificial' in the sense that the specialist is choosing to ignore the in-depth detail of those other specialities in order to concentrate on their own.

In other words, a podiatrist is an expert at diagnosing and understanding foot and ankle ailments but ignorant of perhaps how those ailments affect, in detail, the other parts of the body. In order to better grasp the details of how it affects the heart, for example, he would need to consult with a cardiologist. This is because no one person could even begin to study every speciality and division within the human body, and such a compedium contained in a single book would be so unwieldly as to be prohibitive to studying from. It could easily run into the thousands of pages, if not millions of pages.

Only by breaking down an object into smaller, more manageable components, and understanding how those smaller components relate to each other to make the macro object, is it possible to develop understanding. Size, in this case, doesn't matter, because even the smallest and largest 'beings' in existence function in micro and macro environments and relationships. Even cell and genomes have 'parts' to them, the same way a galaxy and solar system does. Changing the perspective from where we start understanding distances and components would be just as artificial done on a quarkian or a galxian level, because the process would be the same.

Answer 3

Micro and macro are definitely relative to the size of the speaker. The rest are totally irrelevant to the size of the observer. The search for a unified field theory is simply an effort to better understand our universe. We've discovered the relationship between electricity and magnetism, but we can't find a connection among the rest. The scale of quantum physics has no relation to our size. It's simply the scale where our other physical laws no longer work properly. Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) works fairly well, but there is as yet no generally accepted theory of gravitation at the quantum level. The main contenders are quantum gravity and superstring theory. I see no size bias in physics other than the obvious relativity of the micro/macro terms.

Answer 4

Nope...That creature wouldn't categorize it that way....its all relative dude.... :-)