Tangled Physics
Knots Strain Intuitive Physical Reasoning
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22157813 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sholei Croom (0009-0008-5114-2726, Johns Hopkins University), Chaz Firestone (0000-0002-1247-2422, Johns Hopkins University) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Pages | 1170-1190 |
| Publication date | 2024-09-23 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Open MIND (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2470-2986 • E-ISSN: 2470-2986 |
| Publisher | MIT Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1162/opmi_a_00159 |
| PMID | 39439589 |
| OpenAlex | W4403294704 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 35 |
Whereas decades of research have cataloged striking errors in physical reasoning, a resurgence of interest in intuitive physics has revealed humans’ remarkable ability to successfully predict the unfolding of physical scenes. A leading interpretation intended to resolve these opposing results is that physical reasoning recruits a general-purpose mechanism that reliably models physical scenarios (explaining recent successes), but overly contrived tasks or impoverished and ecologically invalid stimuli can produce poor performance (accounting for earlier failures). But might there be tasks that persistently strain physical understanding, even in naturalistic contexts? Here, we explore this question by introducing a new intuitive physics task: evaluating the strength of knots and tangles. Knots are ubiquitous across cultures and time-periods, and evaluating them correctly often spells the difference between safety and peril. Despite this, 5 experiments show that observers fail to discern even very large differences in strength between knots. In a series of two-alternative forced-choice tasks, observers viewed a variety of simple “bends” (knots joining two pieces of thread) and decided which would require more force to undo. Though the strength of these knots is well-documented, observers’ judgments completely failed to reflect these distinctions, across naturalistic photographs (E1), idealized renderings (E2), dynamic videos (E3), and even when accompanied by schematic diagrams of the knots’ structures (E4). Moreover, these failures persisted despite accurate identification of the topological differences between the knots (E5); in other words, even when observers correctly perceived the underlying structure of the knot, they failed to correctly judge its strength. These results expose a blindspot in physical reasoning, placing new constraints on general-purpose theories of scene understanding
Algebra over a field · Cognitive science · Physics · Pure mathematics · Theoretical physics · Architecture and Computational Design · Computer Science · Design Education and Practice · Mathematics · Medicine · Music Technology and Sound Studies · Psychology
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |