It's not the math, it's the thing that the math only represents, symbolizes, or denotates, which is Real.
Math may be “real” in accurately representing a real object, but the real thing is the thing represented by math.
The following interview with the edgy, interesting, young, cosmological math professor from MIT, Max Tegmark, alas, with his “mathematical universe hypothesis,” seems to be saying that math itself is a real object, and not saying that only the object that math describes is real. But he seems at least somewhat to be on our path too, because he is working with real mathematical objects and not just merely describing real objects. Godhood is one of those Objects, that is, a Supreme Object, or Objects, at the zenith of material evolution.
Discover magazine: “...I see where you’re heading. Without these descriptors, we’re left with only math.
Tegmark: The physicist Eugene Wigner wrote a famous essay in the 1960s called “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences.” In that essay he asked why nature is so accurately described by mathematics. The question did not start with him. As far back as Pythagoras in the ancient Greek era, there was the idea that the universe was built on mathematics. In the 17th century Galileo eloquently wrote that nature is a “grand book” that is “written in the language of mathematics.” Then, of course, there was the great Greek philosopher Plato, who said the objects of mathematics really exist.
How does your mathematical universe hypothesis fit in?
Well, Galileo and Wigner and lots of other scientists would argue that abstract mathematics “describes” reality. Plato would say that mathematics exists somewhere out there as an ideal reality. I am working in between. I have this sort of crazy-sounding idea that the reason why mathematics is so effective at describing reality is that it is reality. That is the mathematical universe hypothesis: Mathematical things actually exist, and they are actually physical reality....”
Interview continues here
Math may be “real” in accurately representing a real object, but the real thing is the thing represented by math.
The following interview with the edgy, interesting, young, cosmological math professor from MIT, Max Tegmark, alas, with his “mathematical universe hypothesis,” seems to be saying that math itself is a real object, and not saying that only the object that math describes is real. But he seems at least somewhat to be on our path too, because he is working with real mathematical objects and not just merely describing real objects. Godhood is one of those Objects, that is, a Supreme Object, or Objects, at the zenith of material evolution.
Discover magazine: “...I see where you’re heading. Without these descriptors, we’re left with only math.
Tegmark: The physicist Eugene Wigner wrote a famous essay in the 1960s called “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences.” In that essay he asked why nature is so accurately described by mathematics. The question did not start with him. As far back as Pythagoras in the ancient Greek era, there was the idea that the universe was built on mathematics. In the 17th century Galileo eloquently wrote that nature is a “grand book” that is “written in the language of mathematics.” Then, of course, there was the great Greek philosopher Plato, who said the objects of mathematics really exist.
How does your mathematical universe hypothesis fit in?
Well, Galileo and Wigner and lots of other scientists would argue that abstract mathematics “describes” reality. Plato would say that mathematics exists somewhere out there as an ideal reality. I am working in between. I have this sort of crazy-sounding idea that the reason why mathematics is so effective at describing reality is that it is reality. That is the mathematical universe hypothesis: Mathematical things actually exist, and they are actually physical reality....”
Interview continues here
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment