Display:
I call current theoretical high-energy physics metatheoretical physics. I also used to make the joke that I chose to get a Ph.D. in mathematics and not physics so I didn't have to feel embarrassed by my subject matter.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jun 25th, 2006 at 07:40:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Mathematics as a refuge from physics? Considering the internal difficulties with mathematics, that doesn't seem like such a great refuge...
by asdf on Sun Jun 25th, 2006 at 07:21:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What internal difficulties do you mean?

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 02:20:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
2 + 2 = 5

Believe me.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:06:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sure, under suitable a definition of '='.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:38:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And a suitable definition of '+'. And of '2' and '5'.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:40:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And of "believe" and of "me".

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:41:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Then I'm glad we agree.

(under a suitable definition of "agree").

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:48:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And of "definition".

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 07:55:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...in the recursive general case.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 11:33:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You mean the one that goes

 if(FALSE) then agree

?

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 11:34:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Close.

I think the Uncertainty Principle should really be named the Indecisiveness Principle.

It's not that the Universe is random, it's more that it can't actually make up its mind about anything definite unless you stand over and force it to. (Boolean values included.)

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 01:18:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the universe.  It is really hard to get them to make up their minds!  

The Fates are kind.
by Gaianne on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 01:44:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No we're creating the Universe to our image?

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 03:05:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's a reasonable explanation for why String Theory doesn't work.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 06:30:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, for example, the hoops you have to jump through to make set theory internally consistent...
by asdf on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 08:37:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It cannot be proven to be internally consistent, AFAIK.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 08:53:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If you worry about that, just adopt some flavour of constructivism or other, and get on with your work. As a user of applied mathematics, every theorem you'll ever use will still be true, with a little more work.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 09:00:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Doesn't it bother you just a bit that the formal foundation for big chunks of mathematics gets wrapped around the axle so easily?
by asdf on Mon Jun 26th, 2006 at 10:12:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I think the formalists (Hilbert and his coterie) were a little extreme.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 03:06:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They were also proved wrong by Gödel.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 03:19:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you a platonist?

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 03:19:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Not sure I want to be pigeonholed philosophy-wise. It just seems weird that mathematics does, on the one hand, do an amazing job of providing tools that can be applied to physics (and the other practical arts) and give arbitrarily accurate results, but then at the same time it can get so completely fouled up itself when you try to do rigorous analysis...
by asdf on Tue Jun 27th, 2006 at 11:33:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series