Question

Why does this happen?

Hey guys... In our physical world its interesting how "things" in motion or force acted upon it would generally take the EASIER route right? I mean generally... A charge, object, anything would take a easier route!

Answer 1

Imagine to objects resisting each other forcing each other to just move away or be PUSHED away, object 1 can move freely while as object 2 cant due to a certain kind of resistances. object 1 wouldn't even bother to resist object 2's resistance and would move to the more "freely" direction or lets say specifically an easier route. Hope you guys understood me... And why does this happen? Generally?

Answer 2

@experimentX @Jemurray3 @Carl_Pham @ghazi

Answer 3

What do you guys think?!

Answer 4

by easier means every possible path where potential energy should be least and of course its nature everything goes for shortest path, even our mind always look for shortest possible route, i didnt get your question exactly but as far as i got the resistance thing, i am sure none of the matter likes obstacle or resistance whilst in motion so if object1 can move without any resistance why would it bother about resistance , it will move freely

Answer 5

it saves time

Answer 6

Why does what happen? Anything? Because we see it that way. Since our senses are limited, we are generally aware of only a small part of spacetime, and as we move through it, we observe the surroundings change. It's possible to regard this change as entirely the result of our own movement and change, but we generally prefer to attribute it to changes occuring in the outside world -- what we call motion, growth, decay, et cetera.

Why does a sequence of events happen along one trajectory instead of another? Our best theory says it does not, it actually "happens" in some sense along all conceivable trajectories, but along most of these, the influence of the process on any other processes cancels with the influence along nearby trajectories. Only in the neighborhood of the classical trajectory does the influence add coherently, and, for most practical macroscopic processes, that's all we perceive.

I think you may be anthropomorphizing this too much. It's not like an object experiences forces the way you experience internal motives, and then gets to choose how it rseponds, the way (you think) you do. In some sense, and within the framework of classical mechanics, to ask whys an object "chooses" this path over that other is akin to asking why 2 + 2 "chooses" to be 4 instead of 5 or 6 billion and 1. There are no choices, because there are no real options.

You may be mistaking the fact that you can describe an option with the possibility of the option existing. People make this mistake all the time: because they can *describe* something like faster-than-light travel , life after death, or a Star Trek transporter they imagine it must ipso facto be a logical possibility, just perhaps undiscovered or forbidden by some natural law. But that's not always the case. English (or any other human language) is sufficiently ambiguous that it is quite possible to describe something convincingly which is logically incoherent -- which cannot exist, even in principle, even if the laws of the universe could be changed any way you like -- which is as nonsensical as saying 2+2 might equal 5 in some universe.

Answer 7

if we will fix this point "Why does what happen? Anything? Because we see it that way" in our mind , probably we wont get to know anything, for sure its our perception about the things but it has got some logical explanation. as far as " even in principle, even if the laws of the universe could be changed" is concerned again i agree that its all governed by our ideas and logic to support them but, the thing that you have said is also what you perceive , he is looking for an explanation that why things or objects find an easier way to do work, its all because nature governs it that way , there could be an explanation of things we deduce but you yourself said earlier in my question that " Anything derived purely from empirical observation has no mathematical derivation or explanation at all". things that are empirical or axiom has to be accepted , it has got no explanation. , so i would like to put up a question here, the answer that you gave , is that a justification of the question ? @carl_pham

Answer 8

I didn't understand that, @ghazi, and if you have a question there I don't know what it is.

Answer 9

So generally in our universe things would tend to take the easier route than the harder tougher ones! @Carl_Pham I liked your philosophy and description of things very interesting. And thanks @ghazi for your brief answer.

Answer 10

the shortest path takes the leaset energy,
any Slight deviation from the path , would require some extra energy

Answer 11

Ow, so to be more technical... The easiest "path" would generally mean the least path that would require energy or as @ghazi said the lowest potential energy :) Makes a lot of sense thanks guys!