Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New features!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

123 submissions , 104 unreviewed
3,547 questions , 1,198 unanswered
4,552 answers , 19,366 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
411 active unimported users
More ...

What is phenomenological equation and phenomenological model?

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
128 views

I come across these terms in some papers. My understanding is that it is an equation or model describing a phenomenon. Usually, the equations are given and claimed to be true with only some explanations and justification, but not derived from the first principle. The reason is often a bit obscure to follow, on what base they can do that with high confidence? How can they derive it in the first place? If the only purpose is to generate the expected phenomenon, how can they justify it is really the equation governing the phenomenon?

Is there good definition and explanations of these two terms? I expect few solid physics examples should make it easy to understand.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-07 14:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user hwlau
asked Aug 30, 2013 in Phenomenology by hwlau (85 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Mar 7, 2014

2 Answers

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

Some examples come to my mind:

  • Fourier's law of heat conduction $\vec{J} = -c\vec{\nabla}T$ in crystalline solids is a good example of a phenomenological law. It is an ampirical law easy to verify in a broad range of materials in various phases and yet, as explained in this presentation, there is no derivation of it from first principles in solids and people that do try the exercise just find stranger and stranger results. Macroscopically it is easy to make sense of it in many ways, one of the most rigorous one being the linear response theory...but this is still a phenomenological assumption.

  • When in high school mechanics you look at balances of forces between the gravitational pulling from the Earth on you and the reaction from the ground so that you can stand still, you phenomenologically put the reaction of the ground because you know it is there but there is almost no way to derive it from first principle.

  • The whole Landau theory of phase transitions is phenomenological as well but explains a lot of things and has been in some way rationalized by Ginzburg although we are far from first principle derivation shere.

But I think that where there might be confusion here is that phenomenology and devising models to describe what's going on in Nature is what everyday physics is mostly about while another part of Physics (the same people or others) of course tries to relate all of them in coherent framework/story.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-07 14:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user gatsu
answered Aug 30, 2013 by gatsu (40 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

You could read the definition in dozens of dictionaries and encyclopedias like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology_%28science%29

My feeling is that the term is related to the word "Phenomena" that is something that is observed. Thus, the phenomenological models and equations describe rather instrument readings than some fundamental processes behind it. For example, there is a relaxation time $\alpha$ in quantum physics which is often taken as a constant in the exponential factor $e^{-\alpha t}$ since the experimental results show nearly exponential decay of the non-equilibrium particle concentration. That is the phenomenological approach. Alternative approach is to compute this quantity using fundamental physics and taken into account scattering processes standing behind this exponential decay.

Usually, phenomenological method utilizes a kind of scientific intuition. Soon or later, most phenomenological quantities are proved by theoretical computations if they describe the experimental situation with satisfactory accuracy.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-07 14:33 (UCT), posted by SE-user freude
answered Aug 30, 2013 by freude (-20 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar\varnothing$sicsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...