"Let me start by posing what I tike to call 'the fundamental problem of equilibrium theory': how is economic equilibrium attained? A dual question more commonly raised is: why is economic equilibrium stable? Behind these questions lie the problem of modeling economic processes and introducing dynamics into equilibrium theory. A successful attack here would give greater validity to equilibrium theory. It may be however that a resolution of this fundamental problem will require a recasting of the foundations of equilibrium theory." (Steven Smale, "Some Dynamics Questions in Mathematical Economics", 1980)
"In physics it is usual to give alternative theoretical treatments of the same phenomenon. We construct different models for different purposes, with different equations to describe them. Which is the right model, which the 'true' set of equations? The question is a mistake. One model brings out some aspects of the phenomenon; a different model brings out others. Some equations give a rougher estimate for a quantity of interest, but are easier to solve. No single model serves all purposes best." (Nancy Cartwright, "How the Laws of Physics Lie", 1983)
"Physics is like that. It is important that the models we construct allow us to draw the right conclusions about the behaviour of the phenomena and their causes. But it is not essential that the models accurately describe everything that actually happens; and in general it will not be possible for them to do so, and for much the same reasons. The requirements of the theory constrain what can be literally represented. This does not mean that the right lessons cannot be drawn. Adjustments are made where literal correctness does not matter very much in order to get the correct effects where we want them; and very often, as in the staging example, one distortion is put right by another. That is why it often seems misleading to say that a particular aspect of a model is false to reality: given the other constraints that is just the way to restore the representation." (Nancy Cartwright, "How the Laws of Physics Lie", 1983)
"Cellular automata are mathematical models for complex natural systems containing large numbers of simple identical components with local interactions. They consist of a lattice of sites, each with a finite set of possible values. The value of the sites evolve synchronously in discrete time steps according to identical rules. The value of a particular site is determined by the previous values of a neighbourhood of sites around it." (Stephen Wolfram, "Nonlinear Phenomena, Universality and complexity in cellular automata", Physica 10D, 1984)
"Mathematical model making is an art. If the model is too small, a great deal of analysis and numerical solution can be done, but the results, in general, can be meaningless. If the model is too large, neither analysis nor numerical solution can be carried out, the interpretation of the results is in any case very difficult, and there is great difficulty in obtaining the numerical values of the parameters needed for numerical results." (Richard E Bellman, "Eye of the Hurricane: An Autobiography", 1984)
“Theoretical scientists, inching away from the safe and known, skirting the point of no return, confront nature with a free invention of the intellect. They strip the discovery down and wire it into place in the form of mathematical models or other abstractions that define the perceived relation exactly. The now-naked idea is scrutinized with as much coldness and outward lack of pity as the naturally warm human heart can muster. They try to put it to use, devising experiments or field observations to test its claims. By the rules of scientific procedure it is then either discarded or temporarily sustained. Either way, the central theory encompassing it grows. If the abstractions survive they generate new knowledge from which further exploratory trips of the mind can be planned. Through the repeated alternation between flights of the imagination and the accretion of hard data, a mutual agreement on the workings of the world is written, in the form of natural law.” (Edward O Wilson, “Biophilia”, 1984)
"The large-scale computer models of systems ecology do not fit under the heading of holism at all. Rather they are forms of large-scale reductionism: the objects of study are the naively given 'parts' -abundances or biomasses of populations. No new objects of study arise at the community level. The research is usually conducted on a single system - a lake, forest, or prairie - and the results are measurements of and projections for that lake, forest, or prairie, with no attempts to find the properties of lakes, forests, or prairies in general. Such modeling requires vast amounts of data for its simulations, and much of the scientific effort goes into problems of estimation." (Richard Levins & Richard C Lewontin, "The Dialectical Biologist", 1985)
"One of the features that distinguishes applied mathematics is its interest in framing important questions about the observed world in a mathematical way. This process of translation into a mathematical form can give a better handle for certain problems than would be otherwise possible. We call this the modeling process. It combines formal reasoning with intuitive insights. Understanding the models devised by others is a first step in learning some of the skills involved, and that is how we proceed in this text, which is an informal introduction to the mathematics of dynamical systems." (Edward Beltrami, "Mathematics for Dynamic Modeling", 1987)
"The essence of modeling, as we see it, is that one begins with a nontrivial word problem about the world around us. We then grapple with the not always obvious problem of how it can be posed as a mathematical question. Emphasis is on the evolution of a roughly conceived idea into a more abstract but manageable form in which inessentials have been eliminated. One of the lessons learned is that there is no best model, only better ones." (Edward Beltrami,"Mathematics for Dynamic Modeling", 1987)
"Even if there is only one possible unified theory, it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?" (Stephen W Hawking, "A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes", 1988)
"Symmetries abound in nature, in technology, and - especially - in the simplified mathematical models we study so assiduously. Symmetries complicate things and simplify them. They complicate them by introducing exceptional types of behavior, increasing the number of variables involved, and making vanish things that usually do not vanish. They simplify them by introducing exceptional types of behavior, increasing the number of variables involved, and making vanish things that usually do not vanish. They violate all the hypotheses of our favorite theorems, yet lead to natural generalizations of those theorems. It is now standard to study the 'generic' behavior of dynamical systems. Symmetry is not generic. The answer is to work within the world of symmetric systems and to examine a suitably restricted idea of genericity." (Ian Stewart, "Bifurcation with symmetry", 1988)
“The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?” (Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", 1988)
No comments:
Post a Comment