4
1 Introduction: The Nature of Biophysics
to embrace one model over another, we apply ‘Occam’s Razor’: Do not introduce
complication if a simpler explanation suffices! The best models over a given realm
of observation use the least number of assumptions to predict what is measured.
Many early conceptual models of the world developed by the human species
were contained in stories and lessons based on an attempt to make sense of their
experiences. Inevitable to the evolution of world descriptions is confrontation with
observation. A natural reaction to a discovery of discrepancy with a favored model
is dismissal or denial of the observation. Models with a degree of success are not
easily erased from the mind, or from the lore of a society, particularly if there are no
ready replacements. We all have a resistance to changing our world view, since our
deep-seated views can be stabilizing factors in our lives.
But there is a chance that individuals or groups will be able to formulate a better
model of the world, or the universe. The chances for an improved model increase
with the number of smart individuals freely thinking about related concepts and
problems, and may increase geometrically with the number of such individuals
communicating through the free exchange of ideas. Thus, skilled individuals
engaged in careful observation, in the creative process, and in the sharing of ideas,
are catalytic elements in conceptual model building.
1.3 Conceptual Models and Natural Sciences
God made the integers, all else is the work of man.
——Leopold Kronecker
If we restrict a study to conceptual models which conform to exacting (quantitative) observations, then that study becomes a science. Those concepts which
are imprecisely introduced or ill-defined are not refined enough to be part of
a science, although they may make good poetry and be stimulating to thought.
They might even be precursors to a measurable entity in an exact science. In
contrast, if a concept is connected to a reproducible measurement, then that concept
becomes an ‘observable’, whose behavior can be scientifically studied in relation
to other observables. Beauty is not yet a scientific concept. So far, there is no
accepted physiological, psychological or neurological definition of beauty which
can be consistently measured. On the other hand, time is an observable: We simply
define time to be what is measured by a clock. In turn, a clock is a device which
passes through a finite sequence of states repeatedly, with each smallest repetition
determining a single period of the clock. Comparing the number of such periods to
the progress of other sequences of events, such as the beating of a heart, constitutes
a measurement of the time interval for those other events.
Pinning a concept to a measurement circumvents much of the ambiguity in
which argument thrives. As confirmation of the predictions of a model relies on
the scope and precision of measuring instruments, verification of a theory is limited
1 Introduction: The Nature of Biophysics
to embrace one model over another, we apply ‘Occam’s Razor’: Do not introduce
complication if a simpler explanation suffices! The best models over a given realm
of observation use the least number of assumptions to predict what is measured.
Many early conceptual models of the world developed by the human species
were contained in stories and lessons based on an attempt to make sense of their
experiences. Inevitable to the evolution of world descriptions is confrontation with
observation. A natural reaction to a discovery of discrepancy with a favored model
is dismissal or denial of the observation. Models with a degree of success are not
easily erased from the mind, or from the lore of a society, particularly if there are no
ready replacements. We all have a resistance to changing our world view, since our
deep-seated views can be stabilizing factors in our lives.
But there is a chance that individuals or groups will be able to formulate a better
model of the world, or the universe. The chances for an improved model increase
with the number of smart individuals freely thinking about related concepts and
problems, and may increase geometrically with the number of such individuals
communicating through the free exchange of ideas. Thus, skilled individuals
engaged in careful observation, in the creative process, and in the sharing of ideas,
are catalytic elements in conceptual model building.
1.3 Conceptual Models and Natural Sciences
God made the integers, all else is the work of man.
——Leopold Kronecker
If we restrict a study to conceptual models which conform to exacting (quantitative) observations, then that study becomes a science. Those concepts which
are imprecisely introduced or ill-defined are not refined enough to be part of
a science, although they may make good poetry and be stimulating to thought.
They might even be precursors to a measurable entity in an exact science. In
contrast, if a concept is connected to a reproducible measurement, then that concept
becomes an ‘observable’, whose behavior can be scientifically studied in relation
to other observables. Beauty is not yet a scientific concept. So far, there is no
accepted physiological, psychological or neurological definition of beauty which
can be consistently measured. On the other hand, time is an observable: We simply
define time to be what is measured by a clock. In turn, a clock is a device which
passes through a finite sequence of states repeatedly, with each smallest repetition
determining a single period of the clock. Comparing the number of such periods to
the progress of other sequences of events, such as the beating of a heart, constitutes
a measurement of the time interval for those other events.
Pinning a concept to a measurement circumvents much of the ambiguity in
which argument thrives. As confirmation of the predictions of a model relies on
the scope and precision of measuring instruments, verification of a theory is limited