la physique ne peut pas expliquer Mona Lisa

Trippatif article de George F. R. Ellis de la University of Cape Town, dans Nature.com du 9 juin 2005, via kottke.

extrait:

"A simple statement of fact: there is no physics theory that explains the nature of, or even the existence of, football matches, teapots, or jumbo-jet aircraft."

aussi:

"Can we nevertheless claim that the underlying physics uniquely causally determines what happens, even if we cannot predict the outcome? To examine whether we can, contemplate what is required for this claim to be true within its proper cosmic context. The implication is that the particles existing when the cosmic background radiation was decoupling from matter, in the early Universe, were placed precisely so as to make it inevitable that 14 billion years later, human beings would exist, Charles Townes would conceive of the laser, and Edward Witten would develop string theory. Is it plausible that quantum fluctuations in the inflationary era in the very early Universe — the source of the perturbations at the time of decoupling — implied the future inevitability of the Mona Lisa and Einstein's theory of relativity? Those fluctuations are supposed to have been random, which by definition means without purpose or meaning."

Je ne veux pas avoir l'air flyé, mais je parlais justement de ça en faisant la vaisselle la semaine dernière avec mon épouse et mon pote Éric. Pas tout à fait dans ces termes cependant.