This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Physics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 100 days

This  level-2 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Mathematics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's priority scale.

	Physics was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 14, 2006 Good article nominee Listed August 15, 2006 Good article reassessment Delisted October 28, 2006 Articles for deletion Speedily kept May 22, 2009 WikiProject peer review Reviewed July 24, 2010 Peer review Reviewed April 1, 2012 Articles for deletion Speedily kept Current status: Delisted good article

To-do list for Physics: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2009-05-05 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Expand : All subsections! Verify : This page has almost no citations. Please help! Other : Add to this list

The philosophy section advocates an understanding of physics as synthetic and mathematics as analytical. The status of mathematics as analytical vs. synthetic is a core point of divergence in various philosophies of mathematics. Mathematics as synthetic is argued by numerous proponents, the most prolific being Immanuel Kant, as articulated in the introduction of the Critique of Pure Reason.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason#Synthetic_a_priori_judgments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.100.152 (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would replace the verb "understand" in "understand how the universe behaves..." with, for example, "describe and predict".

the word "understand" is often understood -- if you will pardon the pun -- as comprehend and presumes some underlying actuality for the physicist to grasp. like all other "human" sciences, even the natural ones, physics is a construct. it is, this is true, inspired by our experience of nature and built upon possibly the only truth accessible to us, the mathematical one, but cannot make inferences about any actuality that may underlie that experience. 178.74.7.149 (talk) 17:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the philosophy section being placed up at the front with it's own section is just really weird. i came here to read about physics, and instead got a weird reading article about how physics is actually philosophy with literally no explanation or examples or anything besides a couple references.

physics is not philosophy, and to call the history of physics philosophy is abdurd. there is philosophy of physics. many old physicists have been philosphers. the two fields are deeply connected. but the way the philosophy section reads is that physics is just a branch of philosophy? what?

this sounds absurd, comes off absurd, and doesn't do anything to help me put physics into a wikipediacally sound perspective

i recommend the philosophy section be merged into the "relationship to other fields" section, moved to the end of the article, thoroughly rewritten, or deleted entirely.it's placement and writing is misleading and confusing 2600:6C47:A03F:C443:9D6A:D4C0:8251:D89D (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALSO ADDING that the "philosophy" section directly contradicts the "history" section by going "well physics is REALLY just an extension of greek philosophy" after literally talking about and discussing the history of physics for a whole thorough section? 2600:6C47:A03F:C443:9D6A:D4C0:8251:D89D (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]