Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Paul Davies - How is Mathematics Truth and Beauty?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2020
- Are philosophy and mathematics linked? When mathematicians speak about their craft, why do they use terms of philosophy and art? What is it about mathematics that can penetrate trivial truth and reveal fundamental “Truth?” What are the characteristics of fundamental truth? What is it about mathematics that can elicit the description “beautiful”? Mathematical beauty is not always simple, not always symmetrical - but it is always revelatory.
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Paul Davies is a theoretical physicist, cosmologist and astrobiologist.He is Regents’ Professor of Physics and Director of the Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science at Arizona State University, where he also runs a cancer research project and co-directs a cosmology program. He is also a Visiting Professor of Bioengineering at Imperial College London, a Visiting Professor Physics at the University of New South Wales and a Fellow of University College London.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
Love listening to Paul Davies, brilliant communicator like Robert.
On this topic I don't think anyone has mentioned that quantum field theory is not beautiful at all. It is not even well defined mathematically. Practically it is just a recipe to hide infinities under parameters like masses and charges and get meaningful results. But it works surprisingly well. So we don't really have a rigorous mathematical theory of matter, fundamental particles and their interactions. And very few mathematicians are willing to work on axiomatic quantum field theory. (If anyone has seen a discussion of these problems on this series, please let me know)
P.B.S. Spacetime made a video called "The Geometry of Causality". It is worth checking out because it may give clues to physical foundations of a logic, particularly our logic produced by a brain constructed in space time.
charming discussion 🙂
Brilliant
What really underpin Mathematical structures is numbers and axiomatic systems of Logic. That renders mathematics effective even without any link to physical reality and its interactions. Classic example would be Knot Theory developed to provide a model of an atom but given up as Niels Bohr came with a better solution. But Pure mathematics of Knot Theory developed and reappeared after 35 years to explain String theory. Philosophically, Math is reasonably effective for the reality is drenched in rational intelligebility and human mind is drenched in intelligence to grab it. Finally there's a wonderful mathematical mind which challenged even the rudiments and foundations of math. Kurt Godel. What he inferred was simply mind blowing. "Incompleteness theorems". I wish if a pure mathematician could illustrate deeply on Godel's logic. If so the case, it would be a herculean hurdle to Theoretical physics
Intelligibility is a key idea. I'm intrigued by your avatar
@@Cmdrrnvr1 intrigued. . Characteristic of Intelligence
@@shashikamanoj1160 Is it the Madonna and Child? My email is gffrn202@gmail.com
I think of mathematics as a set of working models that fit real patterns of experience with a varying margin of error. The models themselves are in a way separate from the objects that they predict or estimate and yes, beautiful in their way. However, I admit that I do mostly value their usefulness.
I always thought 1 +1 does not equal two because you have different dimensions (3D + time). So, 1x + 1y does not equal two. Just looking at it from a different point of view (thank you Richard Feyman) :) Love the channel and videos Closer To Truth - big thank you!
Please interview Paul Lockhart
Kudos -- 444 Gematria -- 🗽
If any words of the English language can have a Gematria, why don't we have a base 26 number system instead of base 10? The only alphabets that use their letters as numbers as far as I know are the Greek and Hebrew Languages of the Bible. I have studied Bible Numerics but there is no equivalent in the English Language. I do believe in the 'Q' phenomenon since President Trump succeeded Stinky (B.O.). Good Luck.
NTS: ok/90/use
Why did Davies shave off his stache?
Always fun to watch intelligent people deliberately ignore elephants especially when they're in room in front of them
The beauty of mathematics comes from the principle of graduation, that as man has deduced the rules of mathematics, which apply throughout the universe, the recognition of the existence of the Creator is for those who are willing to do so.
It is understandable that the physical realities are a subset of mathematical qualifier realities, while I doubt if there is any conscious mind that can visualise surpassing physical realities.
Some math. is beauty, some math is't beauty.
I really wonder how Kuhn can simply ignore the huge issue called dark matter which obviously comes out of this belief in "unreasonable effectiveness" of mathematics with the inverse square law already breaking down in something as simple as a galaxy. Simply invoking some magic bullshlt material to make sure their sacred theories can survive observations is very awkward and problematic to begin with. Very little beauty in that, rather a monstrosity
The unreasonable effectiveness of Newtonian gravity means that a theory created to describe trajectories of objects on Earth worked so well to describe the motion of planets in the solar system. No one is claiming that it is absolute and universal. In fact, the discrepancy in the orbit of Mercury was found in the 19th century and explained later by General Relativity. Which again has worked unreasonable well to study the evolution of our universe. We know it doesn't work for Black Holes or near t=0. They are talking about the vast number of "unexpected" predictions within the domain of validity for the given theories.
Where does Kuhn ignore the "dark matter" issue?
This issue doesn't comes out of a belief in the unreasonably effectiveness of mathematics but because of discrepancies between observations and theoretical predictions.
Dark matter is not a "magic bullshit material". When physicians are talking about dark matter they dont mean an actual material, it is more a placeholder for "we don't know yet and have to investigate". The term may be misleading. Same for "big bang", which may be wrongly associated with an explosion.
Even though dark matter is not a "thing" that physicians invented to save their theories, there are many attempts to explain the observations, and one category are models that assume the existence of some sort of exotic material. But what drives science forward is evidence. And if there is sufficient evidence against this models, then this models will be dropped like a hot potato. And that is because scientific theories are not sacred, like religious scriptures.
Yves Nyfeler Ph.D. Dark matter/energy is negative mass particles .
@Jimbus Rift i don't have to. They need it to keep their theories working. I am an empiricist and it is obvious to me that they got something fundamentally wrong in their models
@@orbifold4387 ok at least you come up with a rational explanation instead of the usual ad hominem attacks. If you restrict it to the solar system it may be enough to wow you but for me when they simply postulate magic material that outweighs ordinary matter 5:1 it is highly dubious and questionably unscientific. The fact that it fails miserably to describe the motions of galaxies cannot simply remain unadressed as it indicates that we are probably missing something fundamental
There is not one physical phenomenon that is 100% described by mathematics..not one
Some math. is true, some math. is't true.
twitter = reality denial
I dont think you really want to talk about math. Your true question in these videos is: "are non physical realms possible?"
*Sigh* Truth and beauty are human constructs.
Is 1+1=2 true, false or just a human construct?
@@eyebee-sea4444 Depends on what universe you're in.
Let's assume our universe.
Knowledge is a human construct.
@@ricklanders depends on what universe you are in, WTF, come on man I really think its safe to assume you can use this universe as an example
They all are becoming old day by day.
X-Files
Math is the language of the hostile alien vampires (greed).
The capitalist counting corpses can create stark, sterile, space stations floating in emptiness and futuristic bombers. But unlike earthling poets, artists, musicians, mystics, human beings and creators of joy...the capitalist counting corpses that rule US can't create harmony (real intelligence) because vampires (greed) are ignorant (dead).
Vampires (greed) who suck the joy out of life have joined the zombies who eat the futures of their children.
Zombie Apocalypse is here and happening now.