Unreasonable Effectiveness
In an address to the Prussian Acadamy of Science in Berlin
on Jan 27, 1921, Einstein was discussing the significance of
mathematics in the history of scientific thought, and remarked
"At this point an enigma present itself which in all
ages has agitated inquiring minds. How can it be that
mathematics, being after all a product of human thought
which is independent of experience, is so admirably
appropriate to the objects of reality? Is human reason,
then, without experience, merely by taking thought, able
to fathom the properties of real things?
In my opinion the answer to this question is breifly
this: As far as the laws of mathematics refer to
reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
are certain, they do not refer to reality."
This same issue was later addressed by Eugene Wigner in his famous
essay "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics", which appeared
in the "Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics", vol 13,
1960, and is probably the most often cited reference for this notion,
although it's somewhat odd that the idea became so closely associated
with the physicist Wigner, considering that Einstein could say in
1921 that this enigma "in all ages has agitated inquiring minds".
It isn't as if Wigner provided a compelling explanation for the
enigma, since his conclusion was basically identical to his
premise:
The miracle of appropriateness of the language of
mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics
is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor
deserve. We should be grateful for it, and hope that
it will remain valid for future research, and that it
will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure
even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide
branches of learning.
I would say that Einstein's consideration of this enigma (as
quoted above) was far more insightful, so perhaps all those Wigner
references don't do justice to Einstein (to say nothing of all those
other inquiring minds through the ages). On the other hand, Einstein
gets quite a few undeserved citations for Kant's epigram about
comprehensibility, because he happenned to quote it in his famous
1936 essay "Physics and Reality"
The very fact that the totality of our sense experiences
is such that by means of thinking...it can be put in order,
this fact is one which leaves us in awe, but which we shall
never understand. One may say "the eternal mystery of the
world is its comprehensibility". It is one of the great
realizations of Immanual Kant that this setting up of a
real external world would be senseless without this
comprehensibility.
Of course, Kant was famously discredited among physicists by his
pronouncements on "final categories" and necessary modes of thought,
among which he unluckily listed the framework of Euclidean space.
With the advent of non-Euclidean geometry Kant fell into disrepute
among physicists and mathematicians, so it was perhaps inevitable
that they would find another source for that epigram, which is
simply too good to discard just because you've decided the author
was an idiot. (Of course, notwithstanding this opinion popular
among mathematicians, Kant was far from being an idiot, and Einstein
had a healthy respect for him and his ideas.)
One of the earlier inquiring mind to be agitated by the link
between math and nature was Pythagoras, circa 550 BC. Certainly
the Pythagorean doctrine that "all things are numbers" is a fairly
explicit assertion of correspondence between the concepts of
mathematics and the elements of the physical world and experience.
On the other hand, this connection didn't originate with the
Pythagoreans, but was carried over from various traditions in
the earlier Eastern cultures, particularly Babylonia. Of course,
with ancient peoples it's not always easy to distinguish between
mathematics and numerology, nor between philosophy and mysticism.
Then again, the mystical "hermetic" tradition survived in the
scientific world at least through the time of Isaac Newton.
Return to MathPages Main Menu
Сайт управляется системой
uCoz