1. So many authors of 'dime novels' rely on the concept "Cherchez la femme."
"Cherchez la femme is a French phrase which literally means "look for the woman." The implication is that a man behaves out of character or in an otherwise inexplicable manner because he is trying to cover up an affair with a woman, or trying to impress or gain favor with a woman."
Cherchez la femme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
" ...out of character..." or behavior "...otherwise inexplicable..." based on that mysterious emotion.....
2. Mathematicians.....often the same. You might recall Swift's satire, Gulliver's Travels,"
"... in the common actions and behavior of life, I have not seen a more clumsy, awkward, and unhandy people, nor so slow and perplexed in their conceptions upon all other subjects, except those of mathematics and music. They are very bad reasoners, and vehemently given to opposition, unless when they happen to be of the right opinion, which is seldom their case. Imagination, fancy, and invention, they are wholly strangers to, nor have any words in their language by which those ideas can be expressed; the whole compass of their thoughts and mind being shut up within the two forementioned sciences."
3. Swift makes a point that, even today, is largely true: It seems that for those thoroughly immersed in the science of mathematics, including the real world in their calculations, takes a distant second place.
4. What happens, then, when sciences such as physics, cosmology, chemistry, or biology, use the calculations and other mathematical constructions in their experiments/conclusions? Well, if the precursor is wrong in its assumptions....so will be said conclusions.
True?
5. Cut to the chase: in pure mathematics we can create any reality by starting with seemingly arbitrary assumptions. The mathematician gets to define terms, and proceed to theorems, lemmas, or corollaries....and that will remain mathematical reality.
a. That's different from physics, for example, where a result believed to be true can always be replaced later if experimentation that better reflects reality. Einstein's general theory of relativity replaced Newtonian mechanics in understanding gravitation (but...when speeds are less than 'c' or masses less than that of the sun, Newton still works pretty well...except, maybe for the shift in Mercury's perihelion.....).
6. OK....here is a major difference: physics tries to insert reality into its theories via experimentation, while math is content with reliance on reasoning.
A theory can be built around mathematical equations in physics, but it is then used to make testable predictions. And that becomes 'proven' until such time as another physicist comes up with a better model...
7. In "The Road to Reality," Roger Penrose speaks of three distinct worlds that interact: the physical universe, the human mind, and mathematics. Think in terms of a Venn Diagram....
....but the overlap is well below complete.
a. So....if physics irons out the wrinkles by experimentation....one would be inclined to accept the conmputations.
Cosmology, theories of evolution, have no such compensation.
Therefore, mathematics can't be used to prove evolution.
"Cherchez la femme is a French phrase which literally means "look for the woman." The implication is that a man behaves out of character or in an otherwise inexplicable manner because he is trying to cover up an affair with a woman, or trying to impress or gain favor with a woman."
Cherchez la femme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
" ...out of character..." or behavior "...otherwise inexplicable..." based on that mysterious emotion.....
2. Mathematicians.....often the same. You might recall Swift's satire, Gulliver's Travels,"
"... in the common actions and behavior of life, I have not seen a more clumsy, awkward, and unhandy people, nor so slow and perplexed in their conceptions upon all other subjects, except those of mathematics and music. They are very bad reasoners, and vehemently given to opposition, unless when they happen to be of the right opinion, which is seldom their case. Imagination, fancy, and invention, they are wholly strangers to, nor have any words in their language by which those ideas can be expressed; the whole compass of their thoughts and mind being shut up within the two forementioned sciences."
3. Swift makes a point that, even today, is largely true: It seems that for those thoroughly immersed in the science of mathematics, including the real world in their calculations, takes a distant second place.
4. What happens, then, when sciences such as physics, cosmology, chemistry, or biology, use the calculations and other mathematical constructions in their experiments/conclusions? Well, if the precursor is wrong in its assumptions....so will be said conclusions.
True?
5. Cut to the chase: in pure mathematics we can create any reality by starting with seemingly arbitrary assumptions. The mathematician gets to define terms, and proceed to theorems, lemmas, or corollaries....and that will remain mathematical reality.
a. That's different from physics, for example, where a result believed to be true can always be replaced later if experimentation that better reflects reality. Einstein's general theory of relativity replaced Newtonian mechanics in understanding gravitation (but...when speeds are less than 'c' or masses less than that of the sun, Newton still works pretty well...except, maybe for the shift in Mercury's perihelion.....).
6. OK....here is a major difference: physics tries to insert reality into its theories via experimentation, while math is content with reliance on reasoning.
A theory can be built around mathematical equations in physics, but it is then used to make testable predictions. And that becomes 'proven' until such time as another physicist comes up with a better model...
7. In "The Road to Reality," Roger Penrose speaks of three distinct worlds that interact: the physical universe, the human mind, and mathematics. Think in terms of a Venn Diagram....
....but the overlap is well below complete.
a. So....if physics irons out the wrinkles by experimentation....one would be inclined to accept the conmputations.
Cosmology, theories of evolution, have no such compensation.
Therefore, mathematics can't be used to prove evolution.
