Risky Theories

In AMO the theorists usually work very close with the experimentalists. Very often, AMO theorists do something more phenomenological, rather than concrete theoretical work. They often derive simple mean-field theories, or devise simple models, and stop there as long as the theories and models fit the experimental data. But when higher order effects become more prominent, phenomenological approach can no longer be persuasive. That is why recently condensed matter theorists got into the fields.

However, when theorists are using the many-body and field theoretical approach to the problems, it takes a longer time to get the results. The result can be fortunately strikingly consistent with the experiment, or unfortunately not consistent at all. In the cases of inconsistency, the work done is just probably a game of mathematical manipulation with no use. Hence, field-theoretical approaches are concrete but more risky.

I just figured out I am doing something very risky.