I read with some surprise that iron compounds super conduct (NewScientist, 16Aug.2008, p.31). What will next turn out to super conduct?
Why do we keep finding these things by experiment if quantum mechanics is such a great model of the physical world? What could guide us toward the ultimate materials for high temperature superconductors, magnets, etc. ?
Mankind needs a workable mathematical model that predicts material properties. I'd be happy to see the current version of quantum mechanics fall by the wayside if a new model could at least harness all the available computer gigaflops we have in the world to help us design better materials without resorting to what looks like alchemy!
Science claims quantum mechanics explains all chemical properties, and yet relies so much on accident and experiment to develop new materials! Quantum mechanics as currently expressed might turn out to be as useful to material science as epicycles were to astronomy! Yes, it works, but where does it lead? How can it guide experimental intuition?
Perhaps the blame is the current state of numerical computation. I don't really believe this to be the case. My intuition is that our current models use too many computer flops because they miss the key dynamics of nature's inner workings. As Copernicus showed, Kepler computed, and Newton demonstrated; get the model right and the calculations collapse to what is necessary and sufficient!
Why spend so many research dollars on subatomic theory when we have relatively poor theoretical tools to make the materials that future generations depend on? Our theoreticians must get to work assisting experimentalists, rather than vice versa! The earth is in a world of hurt. We might even find by solving the more mundane problems of material science that we also solve some of the remaining mysteries of the subatomic world!
End of rant!
P.S. I've had one of those miserable two week colds, so this is how I react to news!