godfather of surgery

Chapter 1151 The simpler it is explained, the less you understand.

These past few days, all the doctors at the research institute have been discussing Song Ziming's words.

After pondering for a few days, everyone finally understood some of it. "Classical mechanics" was facing a crisis, and it was time for "relativity" to take center stage.

"Did everyone understand what I said?" Song Ziming asked everyone again in the afternoon.

Zhang Lin, Xiao Wu, and many other doctors gathered together.

Someone shook their head: "I don't understand it at all."

Another graduate student was a bit puzzled: "Isn't this simple? Why do you need to explain so much? I think it's simple, and I understand it all."

Song Ziming said, "Actually, those who didn't understand might actually understand, while those who said they understood didn't understand anything at all, and it will be very difficult for them to understand in the future."

"For example, the origin of classical mathematics lies in Peano's five axioms: there exists a positive integer 1 as the starting point of the set of natural numbers; every positive integer n has a unique successor n', and n' is also a positive integer, for example, the successor of 1 is 2, and the successor of 2 is 3; there is no largest positive integer, that is, natural numbers are infinite; if a property holds for 1 and for any positive integer n, then that property also holds for n'; if m < n and n < p, then m < p. Peano's axioms, through these five principles, constructed an axiomatic system of natural numbers, laid the foundation for mathematical induction, and ensured the infinity and orderliness of the set of natural numbers. These axioms hold an important position in mathematical logic and fundamental theory, providing a basic framework for modern mathematical reasoning."

"You study math from elementary school to university. Do you really understand Peano's axioms? Can you apply them?"

"You might say it's very simple, just five points, and I can understand it at a glance, but actually you don't understand anything."

"We've all heard the story of our mathematicians proving 1+2=3, but many people who don't understand mathematics don't know the significance of the proof or why such a proof was necessary. Everyone knows 1+2=3, it's so simple, why don't you understand it and still need to prove it? Actually, this is mainly related to Peano's axiom. We must first assume that we have never existed on Earth and are unfamiliar with all relevant mathematical calculation methods on Earth. Under this premise, we can then try to understand this matter."

"All the mathematical knowledge you receive is the result of being imparted to you; you can say that you don't need to think about the 'why' behind it."

"So the simpler and more easily understood something is, the less it is actually understood, because it has not reached that level. It is just that people think they understand. On the contrary, those who feel that they do not understand are more likely to truly understand, because they have touched the boundaries of their own knowledge and understand that it has exceeded their knowledge boundaries. This is the fearlessness of ignorance in academia."

"If you want to study this topic, you need to understand the basic framework of modern biology, just like you understand mathematics, starting with the Pinochet axiom in biology. Otherwise, you'll just be getting stuck in some simple knowledge that has been transformed a few times."

"This topic needs to be expanded. There is a lot to do. For example, whether Tong Yongqian's mother's diseased X chromosome came from his maternal grandfather is a topic that is enough to start a new research project and could produce several papers."

"The current testing methods are standard under normal circumstances and do not take into account the rare phenomenon of gene recombination between the Y chromosome and the X chromosome. If we include this rare atavistic phenomenon, in which some genes of the X chromosome come from the Y chromosome, do you think this standard is applicable?"

"This logical relationship seems simple, but it is actually very difficult to understand and apply."

"why?"

“Because the levels of understanding are different. For example, if I ask you, what is the definition of speed? Do you understand speed?” Song Ziming looked at everyone.

"Distance divided by time?"

"The ratio of displacement to time?"

"Isn't this simple? It's covered in elementary, middle, and high school. Professor Song, you're just making things complicated." The graduate student who had just said he understood said with a smile, because he felt he understood everything.

"Velocity is the first derivative of displacement with respect to time."

Song Ziming gave a definition of speed.
"Can you understand this?"

“You say you understand, but that’s just a very low-level intuitive feeling, like an apple falling from a tree. You can understand it, but you understand it because you’re only considering this natural phenomenon, something you’ve seen many times before. Some people say they don’t understand it, but they’re considering deeper physical laws like free fall, and even more.” Yang Ping secretly sat down next to everyone and listened to their discussion. When everyone noticed Yang Ping was there, this graduate student immediately went to Yang Ping to complain about Song Ziming and ask him to uphold justice.

"Professor, Dr. Song is just being deliberately mysterious. He's making such a big deal out of a simple question. Wasn't the problem with the standard just now that it might be flawed? Standards are relative, aren't they?"

"The standard itself is not the problem, nor is it about the relativity of the standard," Song Ziming said.

Yang Ping thought for a moment and said, "Now I'll ask you a simple question. You've learned so much physics. It's a physics question about kinematics from middle school: Newton's first law states that an object will remain at rest or move at a constant velocity in a straight line unless acted upon by an unyielding force. You're sure you understand?"

"Newton's First Law is definitely correct."

"Movement is relative; the state of movement will differ depending on the reference point, right?"

"No problem, I learned it in junior high and high school."

"Simple, right?"

"Simple!"

"Then let me ask you another question: An object that is not acted upon by any force is at rest. Since motion and rest are relative, relative to whom is it at rest?"

"We often use the ground as a reference point."

"Very good. This object is stationary relative to the ground. Now, let's change the reference to an object that is undergoing uniform acceleration in a straight line. So, is the previously stationary object moving or stationary relative to this new reference frame?"

"Exercise?" the graduate student said after thinking for a moment.

What specific sport is it?

"Uniformly accelerated linear motion".

"Very good, very good at physics."

"So now this object is moving with uniform acceleration in a straight line in the new frame of reference, but I ask you, is it subject to any force?"

"Didn't you just say that this object is not subject to any force?"

"Yes, if there is no force acting on it, how can it move in uniformly accelerated linear motion? Shouldn't it be stationary or moving in uniform linear motion?"

The graduate student scratched his head, unable to answer for a moment.

"Where is the problem? It seems that there are no errors or loopholes in the reasoning. Newton's first law is universal and applies to all objects in the universe, and the relativity of motion is also universal and applies to all objects in the universe. So where is the problem?"

Yes, isn't this falling into sophistry?
What's the problem?
"That's sophistry!" the graduate student said, unable to answer.

"Did you ever think about this question when you did so many problems in high school?"

"So, when you think it's simple, it's because your knowledge isn't enough to address the problem."