TFNR - Simplicity, elegance and naturalness
Although appreciable qualities, simplicity, elegance, and naturalness cannot constitute such a relevant aspect of scientific research. Even if they represent important aesthetic aspirations, they cannot serve as absolute methodological principles—nor as a justification for bypassing the scientific method. They must not become imperatives to be pursued at all costs, nor attained under penalty of exclusion of developing theories. In summary, they are good qualities, which may nonetheless pose potential obstacles to the advancement of science.
When we move toward the most elementary levels of Reality—its deeper layers—it is certainly appropriate to seek simplicity, elegance, and naturalness. Complexity arises from Evolution, interaction, and the combination of multiple elementary components and Events, forming increasingly complex Phenomena. It is reasonable to assume that the fundamental principles of Nature must be simple and limited in number (syntactic simplicity or elegance); likewise for the fundamental Entities underlying the Formation of Reality (ontological simplicity or parsimony). But despite this understandable aspiration, we must not presume that the best theories are necessarily the simplest, the most elegant, or the most "natural". And I might add—I do not believe our understanding of Physical Reality will emerge from a perfect, all-encompassing equation—even a beautiful and elegant one.
A brief note on naturalness... The guiding principle suggests that the parameters and constants in a physical theory should not require extreme fine-tuning to match observations. Indeed, many modern theories and models that are progressively developed seem to require, increasingly and more frequently, precise fine-tuning of initial conditions. In my view, this feature stems from the limited descriptive and explanatory power of these models, which—relying on assumptions treated as certainties and on misinterpreted evidence—confront us with the need to adjust, even repeatedly, the surrounding framework in order to preserve their validity and coherence. Not knowing how Nature brings itself into being in the construction of Reality, how can we speak with authority about what ought to be considered natural and what unnatural?
Let us broaden the theme of naturalness beyond parameters and constants, extending it to the fundamental constituents of what exists—and of what can and must be considered natural, part of Nature itself. We have many ideas about what should be considered natural. One of the most radical—and limiting in the current state of physical research—is the evergreen conception of atomism: the belief that everything is, or must be, composed of Particles, or little pieces of "something". Or, in the terms of Quantum Field Theory, abstract excitations of a multitude of quantum fields. In the most cutting-edge research, we find strings, loops, and other strange things. Always objects—physical, mathematical...
We must abandon the atomistic notion that these building blocks are Particles, or something assimilable to Particles—always tiny objects, mere fragments of Matter. We must go further—examining Forces and Fields themselves, those Forces and Fields traditionally linked only to the existence and dynamics of Particles. We must go even further beyond those (Derived) Forces and Fields, to reach the fundamental level: the Elementary Action, the Elementary Events, generated by the Fundamental Force and the Elementary Field, and their dynamics arising from their inner interaction within the Primary Source.
And finally, a further extension of the concept of naturalness—in the sense of what should or can be considered natural, existing in Nature. It is surprising that throughout history, various opinions have drawn boundaries between what may be considered natural and what ought to be regarded as beyond Nature—I do not wish to delve into the variegated universe of supernatural, ultranatural, or subnatural forms.
I hold that nothing can truly be considered unnatural, as nothing exists outside of Nature. Nature is everything—it is Reality, the entire Universe in its physical and cognitive, material and immaterial, inorganic, organic, human, and synthetic/artificial domains.
Nature is an immense, variegated, multifaceted territory. Everything finds its place, its role, and its meaning within the map of this territory—the map we call Knowledge.
Links to the tables of contents of TFNR Paper
