Can all the phenomena in the universe be explained by using physics

define "phenomena" and "in the universe"

>>9006809
More or less. As we start moving towards more realistic and complex systems we have to give up certainty, but I don't think that's too much of a problem.
>Inb4 muh hard problem of consciousness.

>art

>>9006815
>we have to give up certainty
Probability is a branch of math anon.
And quantum physics has "physics" in its name for a reason.

So giving up certainty has no bearing on OP's question.

>>9006815
>>9006830
Einstein BTFO

>>9006809
No, they can be explained with math only.

>>9006842
Explain supernovas with math only fuckwit

>>9006809
With our current math and physics knowledge? No. Physics cannot conjure up materials on its own(inb4 time crystals or antimatter) it observes what exists in nature. Things like dark matter and energy need to be observed before we can fill in the gaps they make for physics/cosmology. Likewise, math can explain a thing in theory, but we would need physics to explain what is happening in reality if the numbers don't add up:

>>9006809
Nope.
[spoiler]If this is a stealth evangelisation/jihad thread, you need better bait[/spoiler]

File: 1482167015483.jpg (46KB, 301x318px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 301x318px

>>9006809
Hello boner

>>9006830
This suggests that there is no such thing as a chaotic system, Which there is.

File: d1767e05268a665342754a69fc531dcb-chao-gif-chaos-and-the-double-pendulum_orig.gif (670KB, 500x171px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 500x171px

>>9007201
Chaos theory is a branch of math anon.
And chaotic systems can be explained using physical models.

So the existence of chaotic systems has no bearing on OP's question.

>>9006809
Why wouldn't it?

>>9006809
not in a way that's easily understandable