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 printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

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

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,853 answers , 20,624 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

What interesting physics problems can't be solved because mathematics is not developed enough?

+ 10 like - 0 dislike
1399 views

I'm curious as to what sorts of physical problems to which we don't have an answer, because we haven't developed the right mathematics yet (or advanced-enough mathematics).

Related to this question on the Math StackExchange: In what ways has physics spurred the invention of new mathematical tools?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-14 18:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user gsastry
asked Aug 14, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by gsastry (50 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Aug 14, 2014
Sometimes, the mathematics is too complicated. An example I can think of a closed form solution for the Navier-Stokes equations.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-14 18:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user mcodesmart
This is basically a "big-list" question, a type of question that is discouraged on this site.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-14 18:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user Kyle Kanos

2 Answers

+ 9 like - 0 dislike

Arthur Suvorov gives a nice comment, I am just going to give a list of a few specific physical problems I can think of from the top of my head.

  1. Yang Mills existence and mass gap (Millenium Prize) and generally the problematic of rigorous definitions and constructions of quantum field theories
  2. Navier Stokes equations and smoothness (also Millenium) - it's not only Navier Stokes, but the whole topic of turbulence that bugs even MHD people etc.
  3. Exact solutions to Einstein equations - we have exact solutions for supersimple situations, but as soon as we would like to generate physically plausible solutions for situations only slightly more complicated, as an axially symmetric stationary space-time (see Ernst equation), the math just does not provide the tools. This applies generally to soliton generation techniques in various fields.
  4. The question of ergodicity of general systems - the "arrow of time" is considered in the most general case a consequence of the ergodic hypothesis. But it has been proven only for a very restricted class of systems. The whole "arrow of time" discussion might get a kick out of a more general truths about ergodicity or even a really rigorous treatment of the fact of complexity rising against the pull of entropy growth.
  5. Finding non-perturbative solutions to QFT problems (see a popular account of a recent neat development)
  6. Equation of state of the centre of a neutron star - this is connected with the previous question, because the conditions in the center of a neutron star are such that a non-perturbative treatment of e.g. a quark-gluon plasma would be needed. The ignorance of such equations of state is a major obstruction in understanding phenomena such as black hole formation.
  7. Good definedness of the Feynmann path integral formulation - you can see a review here. I am not sure what physics can be lurking there, but I believe that a rigorous definition might provide a hallway to new knowledge.
  8. Much more - basically all of the speculative beyond-standard theories are a mix of taking physically plausible steps with solving mathematical issues which spring up at every of the steps. There will surely be a long list which I don't feel qualified to even start.
This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-14 18:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user Void
answered Aug 14, 2014 by Void (1,505 points) [ no revision ]
+ 7 like - 0 dislike

Lots of real world physics problems contain a huge number of variables and therefore have very complicated equations describing their associated dynamics. An example of this is non-linear partial differential equations, which are notoriously difficult to solve. As an example, take the Navier-Stokes equations. These are real physics equations which describe the motions of fluids and their physical characteristics.

Nobody has yet solved the problem concerning global existence and uniqueness of these equations, and in fact it is one of the millenium prize problems owing to its difficulty. Relating to your question, we effectively have an equation describing a physics phenomena for which the mathematical tools are not yet sufficient to prove is well defined and as such it is difficult to talk about how precise the extracted physics is regarding the solution of this equation.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-14 18:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arthur Suvorov
answered Aug 14, 2014 by Arthur Suvorov (180 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$\hbar$ysicsO$\varnothing$erflow
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
...