Stochastic thoughts about Physics and Nature...

Some time ago, someone asked me whether Physics can be regarded as an "Art". I thought found it was a really good question, and in my opinion the answer is clear, "Yes!" because its answer clearly seems to be "Yes!", and indeed it is, but Giving a clear explanation of why/how (or how) someone can consider Physics a sort of an art form and what kind (and in this case, of what kind?) is a not so trivial an easy task! Yet, let me attempt to explain.

Actually The word "physics" comes from the ancient Greek "physis", which means nature. Hence, as for Arts whose subject is the physics can essentially be found in artwork that has nature as its subject matter. It may be represented and have the aim to of represent it in a certain "language" and according to some peculiar criteria such as criterions ( dictated by their movement of appartenence, eg. realism, impressionism, abstractism and so on. .), Physics studies the Nature in its various forms and manifestation, and tries to describe them in a universal and as clear as possible manner by means of a sort of symbolism called mathematical formulae. Many forms of arts, especially those before the 19th century, try to represent faithfully the reality of nature by means of precise and suitable signs. For instance, some of the most beautifull results of such task realistic depictions of nature are both the paintings created by Caravaggio and the statues by Canova.

Other forms of arts, among which I can include Physics, don't look at a precise representation of nature, but instead they focus instead on the analysis of phenomenons and a description of how they manifest. For example, Goncharova's Cyclist does not represent strictly speaking represent a guy riding his bicycle, but also demonstrates the dynamics of a movement. The Picasso's Demoiselles are not depicted solely from their fronts , nor from or their sides, but from both of these points of view! are represented! Their forms are developed and analyzed on the two bi dimensional canvas in a way that everyone who looks at this painting can figure out the tridimensionality of its subject. 

Furthermore, Physics does the same thing of what that modern art does attempts to do. Its aim is to write down what nature seems to be, but in a much more complex not in a easy (ie. clear) and realistic manner than that of , as Canova and Caravaggio. did, but in something that looks more complicated and really difficult to grasp. Physics studies the nature in its various forms and manifestations, as well as and tries to describe them it in a universal and as clear as possible manner by means of a sort of symbolism called mathematical formulae. Its few signs describe movements and solid forms on simple sheets of paper. When you read a book on Physics you can understand the essence of the movement as while if you're were watching a futuristic painting, or when you study the geometry of the space and time you can imagine a curved world made out of a plain sheet of paper. Thus, Physics much like art, presents nature in creative and captivating ways which force the viewer to think outside of the norm.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, physicists are not so as funny and freaky as artists are! At least the when compared to most.!