Russ Abbott's comments are interesting. They remind me of a science fiction 
movie I saw in my ancient past. A member of a very advanced civilization 
encountered some earthlings, one of whom was a hotshot mathematical physicist. 
I found it unbelievable that the Martian -- let's call him that-- could look at 
the scribbles and immediately say something like, Hmmm . Very interesting ( Why 
not give that comment a German accent , Hmmm wery eenteresting!)

Why was that response of the Martian so surprising? The sheet of paper 
consisted of nothing but mathematical formulas. No definitions, showing the 
meanings of the symbols and no explanation of their context in a consistent 
theory. But , we're expected to conclude, the Martian was, after all, a very 
advanced intellect.
.
The point is that this would not have helped even that Martian:No definitions, 
no context. No embedded concepts.
The mathematics is not expected to stand alone in physics. Concept and symbols 
together.

In quantum mechanics, to take an example, the mathematics works. The problem 
today is not with the symbolic representations of quantum ideas but with the 
otherwordliness of that microscopic domain; It lies below our experience of 
this everyday world. Below a certain point, there are no satisfactory metaphors 
for the behaviors in the microscopic world. Without the mathematics, we 
couldn't ven have gone there-- or imagined that particular "there".

No question that it works. Our present technology, based on quantum mechanics, 
works famously well. The concepts  are described by the equations. Medical 
devices, cell phones-- everywhere you turn-- you see evidence that the 
equiations are concept connected.

E.O Wilson's domain in biology, mentioned by Russ, is driven somewhat 
differently. But, only to touch on another example from biology: Understanding 
of DNA itself, embedded in modern microbiology, depends on quantum mechanics 
and its equations. The discovery and exploitation off DNA depend on quantum 
mechanics, and concept goes hand in hand with the math.

Even Newton's laws of motion, described by simple equations, demonstrate that 
the equations do not stand alone if they are to have any meaning, in the manner 
described above. And I could now sail into the deep waters of poor education in 
even simple algebra, and waht that means for the unnecessary "two cultures" we 
are faced with.

I hear again, in response, the refrain that this is not enough. Which makes us 
tempetd to recognize all that has already been said in these e-mail exchanges.

Best New Year to all, 

Jack








--- Original Message ----- 
  From: ch...@nextpression.com 
  To: russ.abb...@gmail.com ; 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group' 
  Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:03 PM
  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] art and science


  A fascinating discussion.  E.O. Wilson made much the same point in his book 
Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, where he argued that a narrow reliance on 
mathmatics had destroyed philosophy in particular, while in general an 
increasing reliance on specialization and mathmatics had handicapped 
scientists, limiting new hypothesis to variation of current thinking in a 
particular discipline.

  
http://www.amazon.com/Consilience-Knowledge-Edward-O-Wilson/dp/067976867X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230443706&sr=8-1

  cjf

   

  Christopher J. Feola

  President

  nextPression, Inc.

  www.nextPression.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf 
Of Russ Abbott
  Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:45 PM
  To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
  Subject: Re: [FRIAM] art and science


  Hi Jack,

  I'd like to take advantage of your post to raise an issue that is 
related--but not directly--to what you are discussing.  

  You wrote, "What has made mathematics so important in science, especially 
physics, is the need for replacing word-fuzziness with precision in 
prediction." 

  Although no one can doubt the importance of mathematics to physics and the 
other sciences, what do you think of this somewhat contrary position. The 
damage mathematics has done to science is that it has substituted numbers for 
concepts. 

  Mathematics is a language of equations and numbers. Of course equations 
operate within frameworks, which themselves involve concepts--such as 
dimensionality, symmetry, etc. These are important concepts. But the equations 
themselves are conceptless. They are simply relationships among numbers that 
match observation. I suspect that this is one of the reasons the general public 
is turned off to much of science. The equations don't speak to them. I would 
say that the equations don't speak to scientists either except to the extent 
that they manage to interpret them in terms of concepts: this is the strength 
of this field; this is the mass of this object; etc. But the concepts are not 
part of the equations. And (famously) quantum mechanics has no concepts for its 
equations! The equations work, but no one can conceptualize what they mean. So 
how should one think about quantum mechanics? As a black box with dials one can 
read? What should the public think about quantum mechanics if that's the best 
that scientists can do? 

  I can think of two primary goals for science: to understand nature and to 
give us some leverage over nature. Equations give us the leverage; concepts 
give us the understanding. 

  -- Russ



  On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Jack Leibowitz <jrl...@earthlink.net> wrote:



    ============================================================
    FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
    Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
    lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
  Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1866 - Release Date: 12/27/2008 
8:49 PM





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ============================================================
  FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
  Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
  lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to