Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Granville Sewell on design in mathematics

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

When we think of design, we normally think of biology or perhaps physics, but usually not mathematics. How can we see design in something that could not be any different than it is? I don’t know if mathematics could have been different than it is, but as a mathematician, I still see design in mathematics, and plenty of it.

The non-mathematician, who may think of mathematics as consisting only of arithmetic and perhaps algebra and geometry, could never imagine the richness that is here, waiting to be discovered, in the many fields and subfields of mathematics. How could he imagine that there are enough interesting and challenging problems to keep thousands of mathematicians busy and entertained throughout their lifetimes?

Many imagine that those mathematicians are just so many thousands of clueless nerds, and think no more of the matter, unfortunately. But now for better things:

Number theory is the study of the positive integers: 1,2,3,4, …. One might think that at least in this field of mathematics the number of interesting problems would be soon exhausted, and that all of the most important problems would be quickly solved; but one would be quite wrong on both counts. Many simple-sounding problems in number theory remain unsolved to this day, for example, are there an infinite number of “twin primes” – primes which differ by 2 (the minimum possible), such as 881 and 883.

Granville Sewell. In the Beginning, p. 40.

More twin prime news here.

Note: Yes, that Granville Sewell.

Comments
1 + e^i*pi = 0 Mathematics is capturing something deep about logical connexions, and once anchored to the real word becomes the proverbial magic chalice that refills with new wine. Try the attempted rebuff to Young, that the shadow of a small sphere should have a central dot of light. Nonsense -- except that the shadow is there.kairosfocus
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
03:08 PM
3
03
08
PM
PDT
This is a red herring. Language exists in a context, and the relevant context is Pythagoras' Theorem.kairosfocus
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
03:04 PM
3
03
04
PM
PDT
So, idealized spherical geometry exists everywhere? Guess what? Everything in mathematics is idealized!EndoplasmicMessenger
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
02:37 PM
2
02
37
PM
PDT
The hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the square root of the sum of side A squared plus side B squared. That would be true of right triangles whether we discovered it or not. Its not because of human design.
Actually that is false in a spherical geometry, which is about what we have on the surface of the earth. And it is false in a hyperbolic geometry, which is possibly what we have in the cosmos as a whole. It is, however, true in the idealized Euclidean geometry which probably does not exist anywhere in the actual universe. It is that idealized Euclidean geometry that I am suggesting (in agreement with Kronecker) to be of human design.Neil Rickert
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
01:14 PM
1
01
14
PM
PDT
I was referring to hand of God imparting to mathematics an intrinsic beauty as in ID [Intelligent Design]. Though I love that idea but intended to mean we humans find beauty only by intense searching, as the author said “Many simple-sounding problems in number theory remain unsolved to this day”. So to stay with your nice example I purpose this example. Most of us do not keep the cubic formula in our mind (like the quadratic) since it’s not pretty. And yet it was discovered and hidden for a hundred years. Point is we humans find what is there (do not invent) but normalize so it fits in. Only the lovely are seen by our young students. Cubic Formula: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CubicFormula.htmlseenKeen
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
01:08 PM
1
01
08
PM
PDT
I'll go with Kronecker, who said "God made the integers; all else is the work of man," though I sometimes wonder whether he gave God too much credit.Neil Rickert
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
01:07 PM
1
01
07
PM
PDT
If by designed you mean invented then you are wrong. The truth of mathematical statements like the pythagorean theorem dont depend on any human mind to be true. The hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the square root of the sum of side A squared plus side B squared. That would be true of right triangles whether we discovered it or not. Its not because of human design.kuartus
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PDT
I agree with you that Mathematics is lovely to her beholders. And as Einstein postulated “Did God have a choice” since some things are so interlaced that they can only work when precisely right. Beauty is seen by those that seek it and as mathematicians we seek it. Or simply, the inevitability of coincidences we discover will titillate us to gather them as knowledge. If the discovered form is not pretty we miss it. I chalk it all up to happenstance. We diligently seek those lovely patterns. Now back to the point of this article, if we find an extraordinary percentage of this domain to be aligned in grand patterns then we have moved from the merely inevitability of coincidences to the intelligently designed. I think it is the prior.seenKeen
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
11:36 AM
11
11
36
AM
PDT
I don’t know if mathematics could have been different than it is, but as a mathematician, I still see design in mathematics, and plenty of it.
Perhaps this is because mathematics is all designed by human mathematicians.Neil Rickert
September 22, 2011
September
09
Sep
22
22
2011
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT

Leave a Reply