On Simplicity XII (Complexity vs Simplicity IV)

"Simplicity of structure means organic unity, whether the organism be simple or complex; and hence in all times the emphasis which critics have laid upon Simplicity, though they have not unfrequently confounded it with narrowness of range." (George H Lewes, "The Principles of Success in Literature", 1865)

"The aim of science is to seek the simplest explanations of complex facts. We are apt to fall into the error of thinking that the facts are simple because simplicity is the goal of our quest. The guiding motto in the life of every natural philosopher should be, ‘Seek simplicity and distrust it’." (Alfred N Whitehead, "The Concept of Nature", 1919) 

"In products of the human mind, simplicity marks the end of a process of refining, while complexity marks a primitive stage." (Eric Hoffer, 1954)

"The machinery of the world is far too complex for the simplicity of men." (Jorge L Borges, "Dreamtigers", 1960)

"The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable." (Sol LeWitt, "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art", 1967) 

"Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it." (Alan Perlis, "Epigrams on Programming", 1982)

"It is important to emphasize the value of simplicity and elegance, for complexity has a way of compounding difficulties and as we have seen, creating mistakes. My definition of elegance is the achievement of a given functionality with a minimum of mechanism and a maximum of clarity." (Fernando J Corbató, "On Building Systems That Will Fail", 1991)

"When a musical piece is too simple we tend not to like it, finding it trivial. When it is too complex, we tend not to like it, finding it unpredictable - we don't perceive it to be grounded in anything familiar. Music, or any art form […] has to strike the right balance between simplicity and complexity […]" (Daniel Levitin, "This is Your Brain on Music", 2006) 

"Most of the world is of great roughness and infinite complexity. However, the infinite sea of complexity includes two islands of simplicity: one of Euclidean simplicity and a second of relative simplicity in which roughness is present but is the same at all scales." (Benoît Mandelbrot, "The Fractalist", 2012)

"I think there is a profound and enduring beauty in simplicity; in clarity, in efficiency. True simplicity is derived from so much more than just the absence of clutter and ornamentation. It's about bringing order to complexity." (Jonathan Ive, 2013) 

On Beauty: Beauty and Mathematics (1975-1999)

"[...] despite an objectivity about mathematical results that has no parallel in the world of art, the motivation and standards of creative mathematics are more like those of art than of science. Aesthetic judgments transcend both logic and applicability in the ranking of mathematical theorems: beauty and elegance have more to do with the value of a mathematical idea than does either strict truth or possible utility." (Lynn A Steen, „Mathematics Today: Twelve Informal Essays", 1978)

"There are three reasons for the study of inequalities: practical, theoretical and aesthetic. On the aesthetic aspects, as has been pointed out, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. However, it is generally agreed that certain pieces of music, art, or mathematics are beautiful. There is an elegance to inequalities that makes them very attractive." (Richard E Bellman, 1978) 

"The test of the intelligibility of any statement that overwhelms us with its air of profundity is its translatability into language that lacks the elevation and verve of the original statement but can pass muster as a simple and clear statement in ordinary, everyday speech. Most of what has been written about beauty will not survive this test. In the presence of many of the most eloquent statements about beauty, we are left speechless - speechless in the sense that we cannot find other words for expressing what we think or hope we understand." (Mortimer J Adler, Six Great Ideas, 1981)

"[...] despite an objectivity about mathematical results that has no parallel in the world of art, the motivation and standards of creative mathematics are more like those of art than of science. Aesthetic judgments transcend both logic and applicability in the ranking of mathematical theorems: beauty and elegance have more to do with the value of a mathematical idea than does either strict truth or possible utility." (Lynn A Steen," Mathematics Today: Twelve Informal Essays", 1978)

"Perhaps the best way to approach the question of what mathematics is, is to start at the beginning. In the far distant prehistoric past, where we must look for the beginnings of mathematics, there were already four major faces of mathematics. First, there was the ability to carry on the long chains of close reasoning that to this day characterize much of mathematics. Second, there was geometry, leading through the concept of continuity to topology and beyond. Third, there was number, leading to arithmetic, algebra, and beyond. Finally there was artistic taste, which plays so large a role in modern mathematics. There are, of course, many different kinds of beauty in mathematics. In number theory it seems to be mainly the beauty of the almost infinite detail; in abstract algebra the beauty is mainly in the generality. Various areas of mathematics thus have various standards of aesthetics." (Richard Hamming, "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics", The American Mathematical Monthly Vol. 87 (2), 1980)

"In lieu of the traditional confrontation between theory and experiment, superstring theorists pursue an inner harmony where elegance, uniqueness and beauty define truth. The theory depends for its existence upon magical coincidences, miraculous cancellations and relations among seemingly unrelated (and possibly undiscovered) fields of mathematics." (Sheldon L Glashow, "Desperately Seeking Superstrings?", Physics Today, 1986)

"The principle of mathematical beauty, like related aesthetic principles, is problematical. The main problem is that beauty is essentially subjective and hence cannot serve as a commonly defined tool for guiding or evaluating science. It is, to say the least, difficult to justify aesthetic judgment by rational arguments. Within literary and art criticism there is, indeed, a long tradition of analyzing the idea of beauty, including many attempts to give the concept an objective meaning. Objectivist and subjectivist theories of aesthetic judgment have been discussed for centuries without much progress, and today the problem seems as muddled as ever. Apart from the confused state of art in aesthetic theory, it is uncertain to what degree this discussion is relevant to the problem of scientific beauty. I, at any rate, can see no escape from the conclusion that aesthetic judgment in science is rooted in subjective and social factors. The sense of aesthetic standards is pan of the socialization that scientists acquire; but scientists, as well as scientific communities, may have widely different ideas of how to judge the aesthetic merit of a particular theory. No wonder that eminent physicists do not agree on which theories are beautiful and which are ugly." (Helge Kragh, 1990)

"Order wherever it reigns, brings beauty with it. Theory not only renders the group of physical laws it represents easier to handle, more convenient, and more useful, but also more beautiful." (Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem, "The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory", 1991) 

"The material world begins to seem so trivial, so arbitrary, so ephemeral when contrasted with the timeless beauty of mathematics." (William Dunham, "The Mathematical Universe: An Alphabetical Journey Through the Great Proofs, Problems, and Personalities", 1994)

"Mathematics-as-science naturally starts with mysterious phenomena to be explained, and leads (if you are successful) to powerful and harmonious patterns. Mathematics-as-a-game not only starts with simple objects and rules, but involves all the attractions of games like chess: neat tactics, deep strategy, beautiful combinations, elegant and surprising ideas. Mathematics-as-perception displays the beauty and mystery of art in parallel with the delight of illumination, and the satisfaction of feeling that now you understand." (David Wells, "You Are a Mathematician: A wise and witty introduction to the joy of numbers", 1995)

"There is much beauty in nature's clues, and we can all recognize it without any mathematical training. There is beauty, too, in the mathematical stories that start from the clues and deduce the underlying rules and regularities, but it is a different kind of beauty, applying to ideas rather than things." (Ian Stewart, "Nature's Numbers: The unreal reality of mathematics", 1995)

"The lack of beauty in a piece of mathematics is of frequent occurrence, and it is a strong motivation for further mathematical research. Lack of beauty is associated with lack of definitiveness. A beautiful proof is more often than not the definitive proof (though a definitive proof need not be beautiful); a beautiful theorem is not likely to be improved upon or generalized." (Gian-Carlo Rota, "The phenomenology of mathematical proof", Synthese, 111(2), 1997)

"The most common instance of beauty in mathematics is a brilliant step in an otherwise undistinguished proof. […] A beautiful theorem may not be blessed with an equally beautiful proof; beautiful theorems with ugly proofs frequently occur. When a beautiful theorem is missing a beautiful proof, attempts are made by mathematicians to provide new proofs that will match the beauty of the theorem, with varying success. It is, however, impossible to find beautiful proofs of theorems that are not beautiful." (Gian-Carlo Rota, "The Phenomenology of Mathematical Beauty", 1997)

 "Whatever the ins and outs of poetry, one thing is clear: the manner of expression - notation - is fundamental. It is the same with mathematics - not in the aesthetic sense that the beauty of mathematics is tied up with how it is expressed - but in the sense that mathematical truths are revealed, exploited and developed by various notational innovations." (James R Brown, “Philosophy of Mathematics”, 1999)

"The spirit of mathematics and the essence of its beauty is remarkably fragile, because mathematics is about ideas and about thought. Mathematics takes place in the mind, and no two minds are the same. After many years of study and work, a mathematician may stumble on a vast and beautiful vista that unifies and simplifies many things that once appeared disparate and complicated. Mathematicians can share a beautiful mathematical vista with one another, but there is no camera that can easily capture an image of such a vista to convey it in full to people who have not trudged along many of the same trails." (Silvio Levy, "The Eightfold Way: The Beauty of Klein’s Quartic Curve", 1999)

On Numbers: Prime Numbers I

“A prime number is one (which is) measured by a unit alone.” (Euclid, “The Elements”, Book VII) 

“Numbers prime to one another are those which are measured by a unit alone as a common measure.” (Euclid, “The Elements”, Book VII)

"Till now the mathematicians tried in vain to discover some order in the sequence of the prime numbers and we have every reason to believe that there is some mystery which the human mind shall never penetrate. To convince oneself, one has only to glance at the tables of the primes, which some people took the trouble to compute beyond a hundred thousand, and one perceives that there is no order and no rule. This is so much more surprising as the arithmetic gives us definite rules with the help of which we can continue the sequence of the primes as far as we please, without noticing, however, the least trace of order." (Leonhard Euler, "Letters of Euler on different subjects in physics and philosophy. Addressed to a German princess, 1768)

 "Mathematicians have tried in vain to this day to discover some order in the sequence of prime numbers, and we have reason to believe that it is a mystery into which the mind will never penetrate." (Leonhard Euler)

"The problem of distinguishing prime numbers from composite numbers and of resolving the latter into their prime factors is known to be one of the most important and useful in arithmetic. […] The dignity of the science itself seems to require that every possible means be explored for the solution of a problem so elegant and so celebrated.” (Carl Friedrich Gauss, "Disquisitiones Arithmeticae”, 1801)

“The difference of two square numbers is always a product, and divisible both by the sum and by the difference of the roots of those two squares; consequently the difference of two squares can never be a prime number.” (Leonhard Euler, “Elements of Algebra”, 1810)

"We found a beautiful and most general proposition, namely, that every integer is either a square, or the sum of two, three or at most four squares. This theorem depends on some of the most recondite mysteries of numbers, and it is not possible to present its proof on the margin of this page." (Pierre de Fermat)

"A prime number, which exceeds a multiple of four by unity, is only once the hypotenuse of a right triangle." (Pierre de Fermat)

"The theory of Numbers has always been regarded as one of the most obviously useless branches of Pure Mathematics. The accusation is one against which there is no valid defence; and it is never more just than when directed against the parts of the theory which are more particularly concerned with primes. A science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life. The theory of prime numbers satisfies no such criteria. Those who pursue it will, if they are wise, make no attempt to justify their interest in a subject so trivial and so remote, and will console themselves with the thought that the greatest mathematicians of all ages have found it in it a mysterious attraction impossible to resist." (Georg H Hardy, 1915)

“The mystery that clings to numbers, the magic of numbers, may spring from this very fact, that the intellect, in the form of the number series, creates an infinite manifold of well distinguishable individuals. Even we enlightened scientists can still feel it e.g. in the impenetrable law of the distribution of prime numbers." (Hermann Weyl, “Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science”, 1927)

“The mystery that clings to numbers, the magic of numbers, may spring from this very fact, that the intellect, in the form of the number series, creates an infinite manifold of well-distinguished individuals. Even we enlightened scientists can still feel it, e.g., in the impenetrable law of the distribution of prime numbers.” (Hermann Weyl, “Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science”, 1949)

Trivial in Mathematics

“[…] the mathematician learns early to accept no fact, to believe no statement, however apparently reasonable or obvious or trivial, until it has been proved, rigorously and totally by a series of steps proceeding from universally accepted first principles.” (Alfred Adler)

"No one should pick a problem, or make a resolution, unless he realizes that the ultimate value of it will offset the inevitable discomfort and trouble that always goes along with the accomplishment of anything worthwhile. So, let us not waste our time and effort on some trivial thing." (Charles F Kettering)

“Where the line is to be drawn the important and the trivial cannot be settled by a formula.” (Benjamin N Cardozo)

“Nowhere is intellectual beauty so deeply felt and fastidiously appreciated in its various grades and qualities as in mathematics, and only the informal appreciation of mathematical value can distinguish what is mathematics from a welter of formally similar, yet altogether trivial statements and operations.” (Michael Polanyi, “Personal Knowledge”, 1962)

“One might describe the mathematical quality in Nature by saying that the universe is so constituted that mathematics is a useful tool in its description. However, recent advances in physical science show that this statement of the case is too trivial. The connection between mathematics and the description of the universe goes far deeper than this, and one can get an appreciation of it only from a thorough examination of the various facts that make it up.” (Paul A M Dirac)

“Mathematics is good if it enriches the subject, if it opens up new vistas, if it solves old problems, if it fills gaps, fitting snugly and satisfyingly into what is already known, or if it forges new links between previously unconnected parts of the subject It is bad if it is trivial, overelaborate, or lacks any definable mathematical purpose or direction It is pure if its methods are pure - that is, if it doesn't cheat and tackle one problem while pretending to tackle another, and if there are no gaping holes in its logic It is applied if it leads to useful insights outside mathematics By these criteria, today's mathematics contains as high a proportion of good work as at any other period, and as any other area, and much of it manages to be both pure and applied at the same time.” (Ian Stewart, “The Problems of Mathematics”, 1987)

“We decided that ‘trivial’ means ‘proved’. So, we joked with the mathematicians: “We have a new theorem - that mathematicians can prove only trivial theorems, because every theorem that’s proved is trivial.” (Richard P Feynman, “Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character”, 1985)

“The difference between mathematicians and physicists is that after physicists prove a big result they think it is fantastic but after mathematicians prove a big result they think it is trivial.” (Lucien Szpiro)

"Mathematics is trivial, but I can’t do my work without it." (Richard Feynman)

"Everything is trivial when you know the proof." (David V Widder)