I am enjoying re-reading the book 5 Minds for the Future by Howard Gardner. The 5 minds are Disciplined, Synthetic, Creative, Respectful, and Ethical.
With regard to all of the first three he puts emphasis on the importance of considering the same topic from several angles and perspectives. In particular, creative needs to occur within a context of mastering earlier work.
I wonder how might this does and might happen in condensed matter theory?
Phenomenological vs. microscopic.
Strong coupling vs. weak coupling treatments.
Numerical vs. variational wave functions vs. field theories vs. renormalisation group.
A "chemical" approach concerned with specific details vs. a "physics" approach which neglects many details.
Other ideas?
I actually wonder whether we actually do this more often and better than some disciplines. But that perception may be based on ignorance and hubris!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Multi-step spin-state transitions in organometallics and frustrated antiferromagnetic Ising models
In previous posts, I discussed how "spin-crossover" material is a misnomer because many of these materials do not undergo crossov...

-
Is it something to do with breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation? In molecular spectroscopy you occasionally hear this term thro...
-
Nitrogen fluoride (NF) seems like a very simple molecule and you would think it would very well understood, particularly as it is small enou...
-
I welcome discussion on this point. I don't think it is as sensitive or as important a topic as the author order on papers. With rega...
No comments:
Post a Comment