Pianotech

Expand all | Collapse all

Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

  • 1.  Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-11-2022 12:08
    All-

    I am in way over my head here,  but it does sometimes seem to me the we are trying to describe things that we are sure are quantifiable but may not be, at least not in the way we think they are. Kurt Godel theorized  that any mathematical  theory based on an axiom, rules assumed to be correct a priori, is internally inconsistent. Not the thing itself, but something we use to understand the thing.  Again I'm sure I am mangling this and I am neither a scientist nor a mathematician by any stretch. But it does seem we hold pretty dogmatically to our beliefs about some things in piano technology to the exclusion of others when a more open beginners mind may help us to remain humble  and more accepting of other viewpoints. Not to get all wavy gravy or "woke" on the weekend, certainly not trying to start arguments, but this article just tipped over a few ideas in my head after a long week.

    Please enjoy and best wishes to all-

    David


    Why the laws of physics don't actually exist
    New Scientist remove preview
    Why the laws of physics don't actually exist
    What we call laws of physics are often just mathematical descriptions of some part of nature. Ultimate physical laws probably don't exist and physics is all the better for it, says theoretical physicist Sankar Das Sarma The following is an extract from our Lost in Space-Time newsletter.
    View this on New Scientist >



    ------------------------------
    David C. Brown RPT
    Garland TX
    tunermandb88.com
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-11-2022 13:50
    >>Kurt Godel theorized  that any mathematical  theory based on an axiom, rules assumed to be correct a priori, is internally inconsistent. Not the thing itself, but something we use to understand the thing.<<

    Yep, sure, probably, maybe, well... no.  What we can do to get the 'ANSWER" is to read Godel while listening to Bach in a room wallpapered by Escher.....





  • 3.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Member
    Posted 12-11-2022 23:31
    That's a reference to "Godel, Eschel, Bach, an Eternal Golden Braid", isn't it?

    Actually, Kurt Godel's theorem says that any mathematical system (axioms, theorems, and proofs) that at least contains basic arithmetic will have statements in that system that can neither be proven or disproven.  It does not mean the system is inconsistent. It just means that some questions in the system cannot be answered definitively.

    I do like the point made in the New Scientist article - that what we call laws in physics are not like laws in mathematics, which can be proven.  In physics theories can be either supported or not supported by data.  it is an essential perspective that allows a scientist to reconsider laws when new data seems to contradict that law, such as what happened when Relativity refined Newtonian mechanics.

    ------------------------------
    Robert Scott
    Real-Time Specialties (TuneLab)
    fixthatpiano@yahoo.com
    Hopkins MN
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-12-2022 08:58
    Thank you, Robert. I guess that was partly where I was headed.

    D

    ------------------------------
    David C. Brown RPT
    Garland TX
    tunermandb88.com
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-12-2022 09:46
    Math's Fundamental Flaw
    YouTube remove preview
    Math's Fundamental Flaw
    Not everything that is true can be proven. This discovery transformed infinity, changed the course of a world war and led to the modern computer. This video is sponsored by Brilliant. The first 200 people to sign up via https://brilliant.org/veritasium get 20% off a yearly subscription. Special thanks to Prof.
    View this on YouTube >


    This is the conundrum: the primordial foundation of math is assumptions which cannot be proved, but which, taken on faith, makes everything that follows provable and possible. So math does have something in common with religion. Once you make that leap of faith, everything is bound together in a self-referring, self-affirming structure. And look what math has made for us.

    My favorite conundrum is the true nature of infinity. Calculus and quantum mechanics are based on it. It's a very simple concept: an inclusion of everything in an unending series. But on a regular basis, infinity confounds math. An example is multi-verses, suggested by quantum theory. We have assumed that our universe in infinite, but if true, how can our universe be but one of an infinite number of them (only one of which we can actually study). Surely there is something about infinity which our simple definition fails to understand. Once again, math and religion have that in common. 

    ------------------------------
    William Ballard RPT
    WBPS
    Saxtons River VT
    802-869-9107

    "Our lives contain a thousand springs
    and dies if one be gone
    Strange that a harp of a thousand strings
    should keep in tune so long."
    ...........Dr. Watts, "The Continental Harmony,1774
    +++++++++++++++++++++


  • 6.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-17-2022 10:52
    This is great Bill, thank you.

    ------------------------------
    David C. Brown RPT
    Garland TX
    tunermandb88.com
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-11-2022 15:33
    My take: absolutely. We use all kinds of models to help us do what we do. The harmonic series and other things related to how we tune are models, like that of an atom, and work extremely well for us. 😉

    ------------------------------
    Maggie Jusiel, RPT
    Athens, WV
    (304)952-8615
    mags@timandmaggie.net
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-11-2022 21:55

    Thanks for sharing David! I used to be into cosmology as a hobby, so I'm not altogether unfamiliar with the concepts of the article. If I could sum it up this way: 

    We know what we know until we know what we don't know, then we realize how little we know. 

    That's the story behind science of any type - try to find a reason why and then someone will come along at a later time and find out how little we actually knew about that subject. Definitely applicable to the world of pianos. 



    ------------------------------
    Benjamin Sanchez, RPT
    Piano Technician / Artisan
    (256) 947-9999
    www.professional-piano-services.com
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-12-2022 00:28
    Of course laws of physics exist. The issue is more how piano techs (and others for that matter) decide to misapply them.

    ------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-12-2022 11:43
    Fudd's First Law of Opposition:
    "If you push something hard enough, it will fall over."
    --  Sir Sydney Fudd, 1971

    (Sorry. Couldn't resist.)


    ------------------------------
    Geoff Sykes, RPT
    Los Angeles CA
    ------------------------------



  • 11.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-13-2022 08:09
    >> But it does seem we hold pretty dogmatically to our beliefs about some things in piano technology to the exclusion of others when a more open beginners mind may help us to remain humble  and more accepting of other viewpoints.<<

    Doggone dogmatism!  It has gotten in the way of a number of things, but some have managed to 
    to breach the barriers....

    ETD's?  Temperaments?   WNG composite parts?  Jolly's steam voicing? Teflon powder? PVC glue? CA?  Anodized capstans and key pins? Stanwood's digital scale universe? Fujan et al?  

    All of these things have entered the field over skepticism since I began, and piano technology today is capable of repair and restoration work that was basically unheard of 50 years ago.  

    I am still inspired by Bach, still don't fully understand Godel, and am still amazed at Escher,  but I have always loved messing about with pianos!  
    Regards, 





  • 12.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-13-2022 22:25
    I sometimes draw criticism in regards my work of identifying simple measured statice weights that are associated with inertia in grand piano actions. The cry is that I'm not following the laws of physics. I know that calculating inertia requires rigorous scientific analyses using complex computational methods with distance, weight, and moment arm calculus all taken into account. I know that from this one may compute the proper hammer weight to achieve a desired inertia. I also know by experience what pairings of hammer weight and action ratio are imperically associated with particular inertial playing qualities. I know that particular pairings of hammer weight and ratio will produce
    expected combinations of static Front Weight and Balance weight. So I don't need to know the laws of physics as much as I just simple rules to find what works.   Thank you David Brown, for provoking our thoughts!

    ------------------------------
    David Stanwood RPT
    Stanwood Piano Innovations Inc.
    West Tisbury MA
    (508) 693-1583
    ------------------------------



  • 13.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-14-2022 13:06

    And that's not a valid criticism as the static data you use relates directly to the resultant levels of inertia.  Moreover, they are measurements most of us can easily relate to.  I think Gravagne's program gives an actual inertia figure but it's not that practical in terms of how most of us work.  Even with that figure the data produced indicates a target hammer weight (last time I checked.  The Fandrich/Rhodes target number in ATDF is not an actual inertia figure (I'm not sure how it is derived).  

    In your case front weight at a certain balance weight is an reliable indication of the relationship between mass and leverage and a practical way of achieving a desired level of inertia.  



    ------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    ------------------------------



  • 14.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-17-2022 11:16
    Very kind, David S, thank you. This is exactly where I was headed. As in the video Bill shared, I don't think the work we do requires us to digest 700 pages to tell us 1+1 = 2. That level of exactitude is not what I need, I can't speak for others. Real science is the Large Hadron Collider. We are many levels below that.  Touch weight calculations are a component  in a larger picture of sound production, feel and the inextricable link between touch and tone. The aural flywheel of thinking of producing a sound, having it physically come out of you through your hands and feet, into the piano, out into the room then back into your ears and into your brain, rinse and repeat. The flip flop of the subjective and objective. If what I do in the many steps of voicing / rebuilding  enables the player to have greater control  of their output in a transparent way, I have succeeded. Pianos are made to glorify the music, not the other way around.  My original intent in this was to talk about being open to new ideas. Ed's thoughts about the resistance to them through the years is also spot on. No doubt 50 years from now technicians will look back at our work the way we look back at processes from the early 70's, if they only knew what we know now. 

    David

    ------------------------------
    David C. Brown RPT
    Garland TX
    tunermandb88.com
    ------------------------------



  • 15.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-17-2022 13:06
    Inertia is a simple algebraic expression, no fancy calculus or physics even needed. When i plot out my inertia charts the main problem i am faced with is the trajectory (or range) always heavy in the bass vs too light in the treble. The problem with the Stanwood charts is that they are empirically based on actions in which inertia was not understood. This results in a mismatch between touch and tone.  For example, If you go for a crisp clean tone in the top section, the touch will be too light, and removing FW ( to make DW acceptable)actually makes the inertia worse (lighter). The other option of making the hammer heavier makes the tone suffer ( if you are following a preconceived SW curve). In the chart below (Original Steinway B hammers) anything below 200 is too light imo,so my favored corrective measure is to place lead (doesn't require a lot) in the rear of the key to change and smooth the trajectory and maintain a DW line i want.
    -chris


    ------------------------------
    Chernobieff Piano Restorations
    "Where Tone is Key, and Mammoths are not extinct."
    865-986-7720 (text only please)
    ------------------------------



  • 16.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-18-2022 00:39
    The key leads don't actually contribute that much to inertia so removing lead to increase the inertia in the treble doesn't accomplish anything.  The treble will always have lower inertia (because of lower hammer mass) assuming that the AR is consistent bottom to top. 

    So if you're concerned about that you're probably better off just having a graduated balance weight which increases as you ascend the scale.  Pianists may not appreciate that though.  Techs generally think they know better than what pianists want but it's often not the case.  So trying to create a uniform inertia is probably not that productive an endeavor and may not even be desirable from the pianist's point of view.  

    As someone who plays the piano I don't think I'd want as much inertia in the treble as the bass.  The literature doesn't subscribe to that really.  

    Here's where a rudimentary understanding of the physics can be counter productive.

    ------------------------------
    David Love RPT
    www.davidlovepianos.com
    davidlovepianos@comcast.net
    415 407 8320
    ------------------------------



  • 17.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Posted 12-18-2022 02:30
    Assumptions, misnomers, generalities, and rather judgy. But thanks anyways.
    -chris

    ------------------------------
    Chernobieff Piano Restorations
    "Where Tone is Key, and Mammoths are not extinct."
    865-986-7720 (text only please)
    ------------------------------



  • 18.  RE: Why the laws of physics don't actually exist...

    Registered Piano Technician
    Posted 12-17-2022 15:29
    Fascinating thread.
    Agree with the notion of transparency. 
    For the musician there are only two things: the tactile point of let-off and the tone.
    Everything else, like an infinite origami, is for us to unfold.
    Scott Murphy's high speed videos are illuminating.

    ------------------------------
    Steven Rosenthal RPT
    Honolulu HI
    (808) 521-7129
    ------------------------------