To explore the limitations of language in describing physical reality, especially in the context of modern physics and scientific theory, we need to discuss several key points:

- The **inadequacy of human language** to accurately represent the complexities of physical phenomena, particularly at the microscopic level i.e major scientific breakthroughs such as Planck’s quantum theory, de Broglie’s wave mechanics, and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, highlight how these scientific advances challenge traditional linguistic and conceptual frameworks

- Some argue that **every attempt to describe quantum phenomena using everyday language is inherently limited**, as these phenomena often defy classical logic and intuition. He emphasizes the **methodological shift** required in scientific thinking, where classical concepts of energy, position, and change become inadequate for describing the behavior of particles at the quantum level

- The **representational power of language** needs to be adressed. It distinguishes between the **expressive limitations** of language and the **structural properties** of linguistic systems, such as discreteness (the idea that language is made up of distinct units) and the challenges this poses when trying to describe continuous or non-discrete phenomena.

- Natural language and scientific terminology** illustrate how definitions, logical reasoning, and descriptive methods all have boundaries. It notes that while language can define and categorize, it often falls short when tasked with expressing the full depth and nuance of scientific or philosophical concepts.

**Overall Assessment:**

A **thoughtful and critical examination of the relationship between language and scientific knowledge** is needed , particularly in the field of physics. It effectively demonstrates how **scientific revolutions have exposed the limitations of linguistic and conceptual tools** inherited from classical thought.

A nuanced discussion of how **language both enables and constrains human understanding**, especially when dealing with abstract or counterintuitive scientific concepts. It is a valuable reflection on the interplay between words, thought, and reality, and an insightful commentary on the challenges faced by scientists and philosophers in communicating complex ideas[1][2].