The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

Cypress

Well-known member
"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" is a famous 1960 essay by physicist Eugene Wigner (Nobel laureate) marveling at how abstract mathematical concepts, often developed without empirical purpose, provide surprisingly accurate descriptions and predictions for physical phenomena, suggesting a deep, mysterious link between pure math and the universe's structure.

Key ideas:​

Mysterious Connection: Wigner found it miraculous that human-invented math so perfectly mirrors reality, with no rational explanation for why it works so well.
Predictive Power: Mathematical theories often possess predictive power, pointing to new physical laws or particles (like Neptune's existence predicted by math before discovery).
Unexpected Applications: Abstract concepts (like (pi or group theory) find use in unrelated fields, like population statistics or quantum physics, far beyond their original scope.
Inspiration, Not Just Description: Math isn't just a tool to describe nature; it's a framework that reveals nature's underlying order, acting as a guide for scientific exploration.

Examples:​

Newton's Laws: Built on observations but then successfully predicted planetary motion, tides, etc., as noted in Hamming's explanation.
Electromagnetism: Maxwell's equations unified electricity and magnetism mathematically, predicting radio waves before they were detected.
Quantum Mechanics/General Relativity: Involve highly abstract math (complex numbers, tensors) that perfectly describe reality.

The "Unreasonable" Aspect:

Scientists don't know why this deep harmony exists, leading to wonder and a reliance on faith that math will continue to work, as Wigner notes in his article.

It challenges the idea that science is purely empirical, showing that pure thought can unlock empirical truths.


-AI summary
 
""The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" is a famous 1960 essay by physicist Eugene Wigner (Nobel laureate) marveling at how abstract mathematical concepts, often developed without empirical purpose, provide surprisingly accurate descriptions and predictions for physical phenomena, suggesting a deep, mysterious link between pure math and the universe's structure.

Key ideas:​

Mysterious Connection: Wigner found it miraculous that human-invented math so perfectly mirrors reality, with no rational explanation for why it works so well.
Predictive Power: Mathematical theories often possess predictive power, pointing to new physical laws or particles (like Neptune's existence predicted by math before discovery).
Unexpected Applications: Abstract concepts (like (pi or group theory) find use in unrelated fields, like population statistics or quantum physics, far beyond their original scope.
Inspiration, Not Just Description: Math isn't just a tool to describe nature; it's a framework that reveals nature's underlying order, acting as a guide for scientific exploration.

Examples:​

Newton's Laws: Built on observations but then successfully predicted planetary motion, tides, etc., as noted in Hamming's explanation.
Electromagnetism: Maxwell's equations unified electricity and magnetism mathematically, predicting radio waves before they were detected.
Quantum Mechanics/General Relativity: Involve highly abstract math (complex numbers, tensors) that perfectly describe reality.

The "Unreasonable" Aspect:

Scientists don't know why this deep harmony exists, leading to wonder and a reliance on faith that math will continue to work, as Wigner notes in his article.

It challenges the idea that science is purely empirical, showing that pure thought can unlock empirical truths.


-AI summary
fucking stupid.
 
dumbest shit ever!
You have to have a higher education and a free thinking mind to grasp the concept Eugene Wigner wrote about.

Most people with only a high school or middle school education are taught by rote memorization. To them, they just take mathematics for granted and it wouldn't even occur to them to think about it's deeper significance.
 
yes thinking can unlock empirical truths.

math does that.

you're still trying to make science into religion with your stupid Woo Woo tinging of the subject.

you will never have your technocratic priesthood of eugenicist totalitarians.
 
"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" is a famous 1960 essay by physicist Eugene Wigner (Nobel laureate) marveling at how abstract mathematical concepts, often developed without empirical purpose, provide surprisingly accurate descriptions and predictions for physical phenomena, suggesting a deep, mysterious link between pure math and the universe's structure.

Key ideas:​

Mysterious Connection: Wigner found it miraculous that human-invented math so perfectly mirrors reality, with no rational explanation for why it works so well.
Predictive Power: Mathematical theories often possess predictive power, pointing to new physical laws or particles (like Neptune's existence predicted by math before discovery).
Unexpected Applications: Abstract concepts (like (pi or group theory) find use in unrelated fields, like population statistics or quantum physics, far beyond their original scope.
Inspiration, Not Just Description: Math isn't just a tool to describe nature; it's a framework that reveals nature's underlying order, acting as a guide for scientific exploration.

Examples:​

Newton's Laws: Built on observations but then successfully predicted planetary motion, tides, etc., as noted in Hamming's explanation.
Electromagnetism: Maxwell's equations unified electricity and magnetism mathematically, predicting radio waves before they were detected.
Quantum Mechanics/General Relativity: Involve highly abstract math (complex numbers, tensors) that perfectly describe reality.

The "Unreasonable" Aspect:

Scientists don't know why this deep harmony exists, leading to wonder and a reliance on faith that math will continue to work, as Wigner notes in his article.

It challenges the idea that science is purely empirical, showing that pure thought can unlock empirical truths.


-AI summary

Interesting. What inspired you to delve into this?
 
yes thinking can unlock empirical truths.
Numerous posters on this forum have howled in protest if I dare say that justified knowledge can come from pure logic and pure thought, not just from observational and experimental data.
you're still trying to make science into religion with your stupid Woo Woo tinging of the subject.
There's nothing more scientific than getting inspired by mysteries and unanswered questions.
 
Numerous posters on this forum have howled in protest if I dare say that justified knowledge can come from pure logic and pure thought, not just from observational and experimental data.

There's nothing more scientific than getting inspired by mysteries and unanswered questions.
the mystery is the inspiration.

its not the science.
 
the mystery is the inspiration.

its not the science.
Without science, we wouldn't even know the right questions to ask.

Nobody spends ten years in college and post-doc getting a science education unless they are driven by unanswered questions and unresolved mysteries.

It takes keen insight and talent to ask the simplest, yet most profound questions, which never would have even occurred to the unintelligent:
"Scientists don't know why this deep mathematical harmony exists, leading to wonder and a reliance on faith that math will continue to work, as Wigner notes in his article."
 
Without science, we wouldn't even know the right questions to ask.
I'm pro science you dumb fuck.

I'm just not trying to remystify it to the masses.
Nobody spends ten years in college and post-doc getting a science education unless they are driven by unanswered questions and unresolved mysteries.

wrong.

many just want to be a rich doctor or lawyer.

but your initial argument is math is unreasonable.
It takes keen insight and talent to ask the simplest, yet most profound questions, which never would have even occurred to the unintelligent:

why are you insulting people now?

explain how math is unreasonable in being effective.

it's the dumbest shit ever.
 
I'm pro science you dumb fuck.
Your limited by your vision, because your last experience with science and math was probably tenth grade
I'm just not trying to remystify it to the masses.
Nobody would bother to do science if there wasn't mystery to investigate.
explain how math is unreasonable in being effective.
The simplest, yet most profound questions often are invisible to the unintelligent mind.

Eugene Wigner is saying is no rational reason we know of for why human invented math so perfectly describes physical reality and provides immense predictive power to lead us to new discoveries we hadn't even thought of. In essence, why would that be?

The unintelligent would be tempted to throw up their hands in defeat and blurt out: "But that's just the way it is!"
But that is not a satisfactory answer either scientifically nor philosophically.
 
how am I limited?
Lack of science and math education. Lack of intuition to grasp seemingly simple but deceptively complex questions.
this thread says math is unreasonable.
No. It says the effectiveness of math is unreasonable. There is no reason we know of for why human invented math so perfectly conforms to physical reality, and confers on us immense predictive power.
you're fucking stupid!
I doubt any fair minded and impartial posters would agree with you.
 
"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" is a famous 1960 essay by physicist Eugene Wigner (Nobel laureate) marveling at how abstract mathematical concepts, often developed without empirical purpose, provide surprisingly accurate descriptions and predictions for physical phenomena, suggesting a deep, mysterious link between pure math and the universe's structure.

Key ideas:​

Mysterious Connection: Wigner found it miraculous that human-invented math so perfectly mirrors reality, with no rational explanation for why it works so well.
Predictive Power: Mathematical theories often possess predictive power, pointing to new physical laws or particles (like Neptune's existence predicted by math before discovery).
Unexpected Applications: Abstract concepts (like (pi or group theory) find use in unrelated fields, like population statistics or quantum physics, far beyond their original scope.
Inspiration, Not Just Description: Math isn't just a tool to describe nature; it's a framework that reveals nature's underlying order, acting as a guide for scientific exploration.

Examples:​

Newton's Laws: Built on observations but then successfully predicted planetary motion, tides, etc., as noted in Hamming's explanation.
Electromagnetism: Maxwell's equations unified electricity and magnetism mathematically, predicting radio waves before they were detected.
Quantum Mechanics/General Relativity: Involve highly abstract math (complex numbers, tensors) that perfectly describe reality.

The "Unreasonable" Aspect:

Scientists don't know why this deep harmony exists, leading to wonder and a reliance on faith that math will continue to work, as Wigner notes in his article.

It challenges the idea that science is purely empirical, showing that pure thought can unlock empirical truths.


-AI summary
There is no doubt the Universe is logical. The controversy, IMO, comes in when deciding if it was made that way or, in an infinite number of multiverses, ours was fortunate to have had all the correct components. After all, an illogical universe would just be a hot ball of gas or less.
 
Lack of science and math education. Lack of intuition to grasp seemingly simple but deceptively complex questions.

how is math unreasonable?

you still haven't explained.
No. It says the effectiveness of math is unreasonable. There is no reason we know of for why human invented math so perfectly conforms to physical reality, and confers on us immense predictive power.

I doubt any fair minded and impartial posters would agree with you.
the effectiveness of math is perfectly reasonable.

why is it unreasonable again?

maybe you;re the dumb one.
 
There is no doubt the Universe is logical. The controversy, IMO, comes in when deciding if it was made that way or, in an infinite number of multiverses, ours was fortunate to have had all the correct components. After all, an illogical universe would just be a hot ball of gas or less.
Anything is possible. The question always becomes what is most reasonable. There could be a billion quadrillion number of universes, and we just happen to be in the one that is perfectly organized and finely tuned for the existence and persistence of complex atomic matter.

At the end of the day, a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, and finely tuned cosmos does need an explanation.
 
Back
Top