Philosophy

I have always been genuinely interested in philosophy in general, but also coupled to physics, my main training. I have been especially fascinated by the natural philosophies of the Pre-Socratics,  of Aristotle, and of Epicurus.

Through an interdisciplinary endeavor, I have been trying methodically for some time now to study both, their various philosophies of nature and modern physics, but within the context of each other, in hopes of a better understanding of either field.

My research led me to various conclusions: (1) on a conceptual level, some of these natural philosophers have been pretty accurate with their naturalistic interpretations of nature. (2) Several of their well-reasoned philosophical arguments, which are in defiance of common sense and apparent reality, have not yet been refuted! Their theories are not as obsolete as is often thought. (3) In fact, they have sometimes argued for truths about nature, such as the existence of atoms of space and atoms of time, that are now significant scientific hypotheses of major new theories in physics (e.g., of loop quantum gravity). And (4) ancient philosophical rationale can at times be used to reexamine and reassess some of the most fundamental premises (or hypotheses) of current theories of physics. For example, is motion a verifiable concept? Is Einstein right when he claimed that change in the universe is an illusion? Which is more accurate, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, or the many-worlds? Furthermore, the cause of the most consequential premise of quantum mechanics—the Heisenberg uncertainty principle—is cautiously speculated with an original idea, using the Epicurean theory of space, time, and motion.

While a basic question dealt with in this research is how ancient natural philosophy measures up with modern physics, the question is often reversed: how does modern physics measure up to ancient natural philosophy?

Lastly, I'm also interested in the historical evolution of ideas, of how natural philosophy gradually developed into the field of modern physics. In the quest for truth about nature, science without (the wisdom of) philosophy is practical and rational but (arguably) dull, and philosophy without (the empirical facts of) science is abstract and wise but (experimentally) unverified. Philosophy and science must again (as once was in antiquity) stride together, hand-and-hand.