Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Math problems too big for our brains
Ottawa Citizen via The Windsor Star ^ | November 8 2005

Posted on 11/08/2005 8:48:52 AM PST by RightWingAtheist

Our brains have become too small to understand math, says a rebel mathematician from Britain. Or rather, math problems have grown too big to fit inside our heads. And that means mathematicians are finally losing the power to prove things with absolute certainty.

Math has been the only sure form of knowledge since the ancient Greeks, 2,500 years ago.

You can't prove the sun will rise tomorrow, but you can prove two plus two equals four, always and everywhere.

But suddenly, Brian Davies of King's College London is shaking the foundations of certainty.

He says our brains can't grasp today's complex, computer-generated math proofs.

"We are beginning to see the limits of our ability to understand things. We are animals, and our brains have a certain amount of capacity to understand things, and there are parts of mathematics where we are beginning to reach our limit.

"It is almost an inevitable consequence of the way mathematics has been done in the last century," he said in an interview.

Mathematicians work in huge groups, and with big computers.

A few still do it the old-fashioned way, he says: "By individuals sitting in their rooms for long periods, thinking.

"But there are other areas where the complexity of the problems is forcing people to work in groups or to use computers to solve large bits of work, ending up with the computer saying: 'Look, if you formulated the problem correctly, I've gone through all the 15 million cases and they all are OK, so your theorem's true'."

But the human brain can't grasp all this. And for Davies, knowing that a computer checked something isn't what matters most. It's understanding why the thing works that matters.

"What mathematicians are trying to get is insight and understanding. If God were to say, 'Look, here's your list of conjectures. This one's true, then false, false, true, true,' mathematicians would say: 'Look, I don't care what the answers are. I want to know why (and) understand it.' And a computer doesn't understand it.

"This idea that we can understand anything we believe is gradually disappearing over the horizon."

One example is the Four Colour Theorem.

Imagine a mapmaker wants to produce a colour map, where each country will be a different colour from any country touching it. In other words, France and Germany can't both be blue. That would be confusing.

So, what's the smallest number of colours that will work?

A kid can work out you need four colours. But can you prove it? Can anyone be certain, as with two-plus-two?

The answer turns out to be a hesitant Yes, but the proof depends on having a computer to work through page after page of stuff so complex that no single person can take it all in.

And it's getting worse, Davies writes in an article called "Whither Mathematics?" in today's edition of Notices of the American Mathematical Society, a math journal.

Math has tried to write a grand scheme for classifying "finite simple groups," a range of mathematical objects as basic to this discipline as the table of the elements is to chemistry -- but much bigger.

The full body of work runs to some 10,000 difficult pages. No human can ever understand all of it, either.

A year ago, Britain's Royal Society held a special symposium to tackle this question of certainty.

But many in the math community still shrug off the issue, Davies says. "Basically, mathematicians are not very good philosophers."


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: computers; epistemology; fuzzymath; mathamphetamine; mathematics; philosophy; science; thenewnewmath
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last
To: MineralMan

"
Really? I can prove that 2 + 2 = 11"

Yep, I questioned immediately whether that statement really came from a serious mathmetician. I am but a mere physicist and I know that the answer depends on what base you are using.


41 posted on 11/08/2005 9:18:25 AM PST by gondramB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
Getting ready for the new P.C. Social Theory: Kids fail at math because humans weren't designed to understand math. It's not their fault if they bring home 'F'.

In other news, 8 Year enters...

42 posted on 11/08/2005 9:18:30 AM PST by Clock King ("How will it end?" - Emperor; "In Fire." - Kosh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist

My brain hurts!

43 posted on 11/08/2005 9:18:35 AM PST by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
"Basically, mathematicians are not very good philosophers."

I don't want to start a flame war, but in my academic experience(chiefly in Logic seminars), this was generally true.

Of course, the converse is true, as well.

44 posted on 11/08/2005 9:19:07 AM PST by headsonpikes (The Liberal Party of Canada are not b*stards - b*stards have mothers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King

"Then that's redefining what the 11 is."

Nope. It's not. The article said that 2+2=4. It does, in several number bases. It does not equal 4 in base 3. Without defining the number system you are using, such statements are false.

As several people noticed, 2+2=11 ONLY in base 3, but the sum is correct as written. Since the number base was not defined in the first example, I have changed nothing about the definition. I simply used a different base and came up with a different answer.

The article said that 2+2=4 always. That is clearly not true.

Now, I do not know of a practical use for Base 3 math, although they may be one, if there is a physical system somewhere that has three states.


45 posted on 11/08/2005 9:19:09 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13
Russia touches at least 10 other countries. If you only used four colors, you would have to have the same color touching at least thrice.

Yes, but those 10 (may be more than that now...) don't all touch each other. Thus, Russia is color 1, and all the others touching it are 2, 3, or 4.

46 posted on 11/08/2005 9:19:18 AM PST by LexBaird (tyrannosaurus Lex, unapologetic carnivore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist

Well, now we know where the French surrender to the Muslims has gone - it's in Ottawa surrendering to the EVIL genius of Dr. Computer Math!!!

I'll bet the ancient Greeks, Mayans and Aztecs would argue the premise that human brains can't handle math.

I'll also bet that medical science will dispute the argument that our brains have shrunk and can't handle today's math problems.

Finally, I'll bet that this idiot has become lazy and has grown too reliant on his computer and calculator to perform the tasks that manually solving math problems used to require.


47 posted on 11/08/2005 9:20:20 AM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vicomte13

You didn't read it clearly: all that's required is that Russia be a different color than any color touching it, not that all countries touching it be a different color, unless they themselves touch. So, Mongolia and Finland can be the same color.


48 posted on 11/08/2005 9:22:27 AM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
Math has been the only sure form of knowledge since the ancient Greeks, 2,500 years ago.

Incorrect, it's not a sure form of knowledge because we can't even prove numbers have any external existence.
49 posted on 11/08/2005 9:22:44 AM PST by DarkSavant (I touch myself at thoughts of flames)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
A few still do it the old-fashioned way, he says: "By individuals sitting in their rooms for long periods, thinking.

A few? Most mathematics papers are still single-author. 75% or 80% if memory serves. A lot of highly significant results in mathematics are still created by lone wolf thinkers.

50 posted on 11/08/2005 9:28:11 AM PST by megatherium (Hecho in China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those that can count in binary and those that can't.


51 posted on 11/08/2005 9:31:12 AM PST by ko_kyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"Without defining the number system you are using, such statements are false."

If you don't define your number system, then you're talking about base 10. That 10 means 1x10^1 + 0x10^0 is defined in our language, and if you don't specifically state that you're redefining it to mean 1x3^1 + 1x3^0, then 2 + 2 = 11 is wrong. Math books, calculators, and most programming languages work that way.
52 posted on 11/08/2005 9:33:09 AM PST by Sofa King (A wise man uses compromise as an alternative to defeat. A fool uses it as an alternative to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
Assume a=b=1
then
(a+1)=(b+1), (a-1)=(b-1), and (a*a)-1=(b*b)-1
and ......

(a*a)-(b*b)=(a-b)
use this last equation and apply the difference of 2 squares
(a+b)*(a-b)=(a-b)
divide both sides of the equation by (a-b)
(a+b)=(a-b)/(a-b)=1
since a=b=1, and substituting for a and b
1+1=1 or
2=1
53 posted on 11/08/2005 9:34:20 AM PST by ILikeFriedman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King

"If you don't define your number system, then you're talking about base 10. "

Not so. That is your assumption, and it is not accurate. If I am reading a book on programming, there will be a different assumption, depending on the type of computer being programmed.

The moment I write 2+2=11, everyone should know I'm in Base 3. If I write 2+2=10, then I'm in Base 4. In all bases from 5 up, 2+2=4.


54 posted on 11/08/2005 9:35:54 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist

iThink, therefore, iAm.


55 posted on 11/08/2005 9:38:26 AM PST by SlowBoat407 (The best stuff happens just before the thread snaps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jersey Republican Biker Chick; null and void

I thought it is always my fault, except when it isn't.
;-)


56 posted on 11/08/2005 9:38:36 AM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC

Human computer ping ;o)


57 posted on 11/08/2005 9:38:51 AM PST by mollynme (cogito, ergo freepum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

Base 8 is like base 10, really... if you're missing two fingers.
- Tom Lehrer


58 posted on 11/08/2005 9:39:38 AM PST by SlowBoat407 (The best stuff happens just before the thread snaps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
I can prove that 2 + 2 = 11

Ha. I can show that 5 + 4 = 4.

59 posted on 11/08/2005 9:42:49 AM PST by Senator Bedfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
"We are beginning to see the limits of our ability to understand things."

Welcome to the rest of life, baby!
60 posted on 11/08/2005 9:45:58 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson