As many of you know, I am trained as a physicist, and I am not the first to turn my sights on aging. It's always interesting to see what other physicists have thought about aging. One fascinating example is Bernard Strehler #PhysicsOfAging
1/10 He began in biophysics and biochemistry (he discovered firefly luciferin) and switched to aging research in 1956. He made a few hits, notably the Strehler-Mildvan correlation and theory, connecting Gompertz mortality to the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution #PhysicsOfAging
2/10

I've become involved in several fascinating discussions here on X and in other places regarding whether a comprehensive theory of aging is necessary to fundamentally solve aging. What has caught my attention is the distinct perspective on what constitutes a "theory" across different disciplines. Specifically, (a) there are numerous "theories of aging" and a substantial understanding of the aging process, and (b) in physics, which shapes my understanding of the term, we have the Standard Model. This model accounts for almost every experiment except for a few and cannot be fully classified as a theory due to its acknowledged incompleteness.

Let’s think about it since sometimes it is useful to clear up the terminology and maybe even reflect on methodology in sciences. 🧵 (1/5) It’s a thread, let’s start by examples:



As usual, help spread by following, reposting and liking (or not in the comments). (1/4) In physics, experiments usually challenge the existing paradigm, often providing a set of empirical facts or fundamental observations about new phenomena. For instance, the discovery of superconductivity led to observations of zero electrical resistance below a certain critical temperature, the Meissner effect, critical magnetic fields, quantization of magnetic flux, and changes in specific heat at transition temperatures.

Before the first microscopic theory of superconductivity (the BCS theory) was formulated, researchers developed phenomenological models to describe the behaviors of superconductors without exploring the microscopic mechanisms. The Ginzburg-Landau theory is one such model, offering a macroscopic description of superconductivity by introducing a complex order parameter to characterize the superconducting state and explaining phenomena such as the Meissner effect.

Eventually, the first microscopic theory of superconductivity, the BCS theory, was introduced. This theory explained how specific interactions under certain conditions could lead to "macroscopic" behavior aligned with phenomenological observations. This phenomenology is understood to emerge from the microscopic theory as the "effective" or coarse-grained theory. Other models eventually emerged to describe superconductivity in other materials, all yielding the same phenomenological description on the macroscopic level.

Before I discuss aging, let me provide one more example: