Hilbert said "Physics is too hard for physicists"

I don't accept anything I encounter without knowing what makes it so. In a mathematical sense I would say that I can't integrate a new method unless it has proof. Things must have foundation and derivation when dealing with things this complex. This strange complex system of knowledge devised as a collaboration of some very great minds had many different edges. Hilbert, Gödel, Einstein, Heisenberg, Minkowski, Schrödinger, and many others. That was more than 100 years ago. I think that science may be too hard for humans. And as a result, "Physics may be too hard for mathematicians". I have a new appreciation of GEB now. This Wikipedia link on logic seems to have the best examples of logic forms. I wonder how this relates to set theory and topology of space. This is all very interesting and there is a common interaction and coherence somewhere in the myriad of perspectives. I suppose I have to make my own pass at formalizing the elements. The understanding comes in application and not the knowledge of the terminology.

The root of the problem seems to be in language itself. Every person must develop their own system of logic without a guide. Without understanding how logic is instantiated in the mind, there can be no real complete coherent solution. The subjective and objective realities are intertwined in expression and application. The multiple contextual meaning of words reflects the strange system itself. It is more a painting than a sentence and the colors of thought run together and form an image that is only really known to the painter. Perhaps one day there will be a school that teaches something other than nationalism as its primary class.

So my Monte Carlo rain is this Morse Theory at Wikipedia . I had no idea it was already formalized in a theory. It is very much like writing a program that achieves the same objective and then discovering it has already been done. I thought these things all related and it is true. SVD, PDM , topology, eigens, sets, force, space, causality, implication, probability and perception. The landscape itself is the understanding of it. This is positively, definitely, complex. That is actually a joke, but I am not sure that I even get it.

## 0 comments:

Post a Comment