27 November 2020

Complexity vs Mathematics I

"But ignorance of the different causes involved in the production of events, as well as their complexity, taken together with the imperfection of analysis, prevents our reaching the same certainty about the vast majority of phenomena. Thus there are things that are uncertain for us, things more or less probable, and we seek to compensate for the impossibility of knowing them by determining their different degrees of likelihood. So it was that we owe to the weakness of the human mind one of the most delicate and ingenious of mathematical theories, the science of chance or probability." (Pierre-Simon Laplace, "Recherches, 1º, sur l'Intégration des Équations Différentielles aux Différences Finies, et sur leur Usage dans la Théorie des Hasards", 1773)

"So completely is nature mathematical that some of the more exact natural sciences, in particular astronomy and physics, are in their theoretic phases largely mathematical in character, while other sciences which have hitherto been compelled by the complexity of their phenomena and the inexactitude of their data to remain descriptive and empirical, are developing towards the mathematical ideal, proceeding upon the fundamental assumption that mathematical relations exist between the forces and the phenomena, and that nothing short, of the discovery and formulations of these relations would constitute definitive knowledge of the subject. Progress is measured by the closeness of the approximation to this ideal formulation." (Jacob W A Young, "The Teaching of Mathematics", 1907)

"Mathematics is a study which, when we start from its most familiar portions, may be pursued in either of two opposite directions. The more familiar direction is constructive, towards gradually increasing complexity: from integers to fractions, real numbers, complex numbers; from addition and multiplication to differentiation and integration, and on to higher mathematics. The other direction, which is less familiar, proceeds, by analyzing, to greater and greater abstractness and logical simplicity." (Bertrand Russell, "Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy", 1919)

"We love to discover in the cosmos the geometrical forms that exist in the depths of our consciousness. The exactitude of the proportions of our monuments and the precision of our machines express a fundamental character of our mind. Geometry does not exist in the earthly world. It has originated in ourselves. The methods of nature are never so precise as those of man. We do not find in the universe the clearness and accuracy of our thought. We attempt, therefore, to abstract from the complexity of phenomena some simple systems whose components bear to one another certain relations susceptible of being described mathematically." (Alexis Carrel, "Man the Unknown", 1935)

"Mathematics succeeds in dealing with tangible reality by being conceptual. We cannot cope with the full physical complexity; we must idealize." (George Pólya, "Mathematical Methods in Science", 1977)

"Theorems often tell us complex truths about the simple things, but only rarely tell us simple truths about the complex ones. To believe otherwise is wishful thinking or ‘mathematics envy’." (Marvin Minsky, "Music, Mind, and Meaning", 1981)

"Somehow the breathless world that we witness seems far removed from the timeless laws of Nature which govern the elementary particles and forces of Nature. The reason is clear. We do not observe the laws of Nature: we observe their outcomes. Since these laws find their most efficient representation as mathematical equations, we might say that we see only the solutions of those equations not the equations themselves. This is the secret which reconciles the complexity observed in Nature with the advertised simplicity of her laws." (John D Barrow, "New Theories of Everything", 1991)

"To find the simple in the complex, the finite in the infinite - that is not a bad description of the aim and essence of mathematics. (Jacob T Schwartz, "Discrete Thoughts: Essays on Mathematics, Science, and Philosophy", 1992)

"Mathematical truth is not totally objective. If a mathematical statement is false, there will be no proofs, but if it is true, there will be an endless variety of proofs, not just one! Proofs are not impersonal, they express the personality of their creator/discoverer just as much as literary efforts do. If something important is true, there will be many reasons that it is true, many proofs of that fact. [...] each proof will emphasize different aspects of the problem, each proof will lead in a different direction. Each one will have different corollaries, different generalizations. [...] the world of mathematical truth has infinite complexity […]" (Gregory Chaitin, "Meta Math: The Quest for Omega", 2005)

"[All phenomena] are equally susceptible of being calculated, and all that is necessary, to reduce the whole of nature to laws similar to those which Newton discovered with the aid of the calculus, is to have a sufficient number of observations and a mathematics that is complex enough." (Nicolas de Condorcet) 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

On Hypothesis Testing III

  "A little thought reveals a fact widely understood among statisticians: The null hypothesis, taken literally (and that’s the only way...