Back home   |   Bookmark   |   Start page   |   Site map    
Services
News
Channels
Home & Family
Leisure
Technology
Business
Science
Site Search
Free email




Mathematics: the loss of certainty

TheallIneed.com/NC&T/AMS
For centuries mathematics has been seen as the one area of human endeavor in which it is possible to discover irrefutable, timeless truths. Indeed, theorems proved by Euclid are just as true today as they were when first written down more than 2000 years ago. That the sun will rise tomorrow is less certain than that two plus two will remain equal to four.

However, the 20th century witnessed at least three crises that shook the foundations on which the certainty of mathematics seemed to rest. The first was the work of Kurt Goedel, who proved in the 1930s that any sufficiently rich axiom system is guaranteed to possess statements that cannot be proved or disproved within the system. The second crisis concerned the Four-Color Theorem, whose statement is so simple a child could grasp it but whose proof necessitated lengthy and intensive computer calculations. A conceptual proof that could be understood by a human without such computing power has never been found. Many other theorems of a similar type are now known, and more are being discovered every year.

The third crisis seems to show how the uncertainty foreshadowed in the two earlier crises is now having a real impact in mathematics. The Classification of Finite Simple Groups is a grand scheme for organizing and understanding basic objects called finite simple groups (although the objects themselves are finite, there are infinitely many of them). Knowing exactly what finite simple groups are is less important than knowing that they are absolutely fundamental across all of mathematics. They are something like the basic elements of matter, and their classification can be thought of as analogous to the periodic table of the elements. Indeed, the classification plays as fundamental a role in mathematics as the periodic table does in chemistry and physics. Many results in mathematics, particularly in the branch known as group theory, depend on the Classification of Finite Simple Groups.

And yet, to this day, no one knows for sure whether the classification is complete and correct. Mathematicians have come up with a general scheme, which can be summarized in a few sentences, for what the classification should look like. However, it has been an enormous challenge to try to prove rigorously that this scheme really captures every possible finite simple group. Scores of mathematicians have written hundreds of research papers, totaling thousands of pages, trying to prove various parts of the classification. No one knows for certain whether this body of work constitutes a complete and correct proof. What is more, so much time has now passed that the main players who really understand the structure of the classification are dying or retiring, leaving open the possibility that there will never be a definitive answer to the question of whether the classification is true. As Davies puts it:

We have thus arrived at the following situation. A problem that can be formulated in a few sentences has a solution more than ten thousand pages long. The proof has never been written down in its entirety, may never be written down, and as presently envisaged would not be comprehensible to any single individual. The result is important and has been used in a wide variety of other problems in group theory, but it might not be correct.

These three crises could be hinting that the currently dominant Platonic conception of mathematics is inadequate. As Davies remarks:

[These] crises may simply be the analogy of realizing that human beings will never be able to construct buildings a thousand kilometres high and that imagining what such buildings might "really" be like is simply indulging in fantasies.

We are witnessing a profound and irreversible change in mathematics, Davies argues, which will affect decisively its character:

[Mathematics] will be seen as the creation of finite human beings, liable to error in the same way as all other activities in which we indulge. Just as in engineering, mathematicians will have to declare their degree of confidence that certain results are reliable, rather than being able to declare flatly that the proofs are correct.

About the Author
©2005 All rights reserved

  Click here to see related videos
More articles
Forms of matter
Electron characterictics
Data transmition
Magnetic properties
Fibonacci sequence
Ancient societies collapse
Language learning method
Light behavior
Atom measurements
Math and physics links
Universe spatial dimensions
Artificial materials
Brownian motion theory
Turlubent flow
Atoms' properties
Fuel tank capacity
Antimatter research
Electrical discharges
Neutrinos mass
Mathematics crises
Quotes
Have you seen a tall, lanky dufus with a bird face and hair like the bride of Frankenstein?-Elaine, describing Kramer

Having major planets disappear is always a bad sign.- Jim Blinn

Great minds have purposes, others have wishes.- Washington Irving

Great spirits often meet violent opposition with mediocre minds - Albert Einstein


Writers
If you are a writer and want to see your article published at Theallineed.com, just click here to submit.

Info
Today...
In the news...
Treasury Announces Sanctions of Mexican Drug Lords
The four individuals designated today are leaders of the Gulf Cartel and Los Zetas, groups that are responsible for much of the violence taking place in Mexico today.
Do you think Bush made the right decision sending us to war with Iraq?
Absolutely not!
No way!
Not at all!
 
Things to ponder
If the front of your car says 'DODGE', do you really need a horn?

Did you know...
The most-grown crop in the world, in terms of output by weight, is bananas.

Quote of the day
I never put on a pair of shoes until I've worn them at least five years.
Samuel Goldwyn

Featured article
"Girl tech" toys: the gadgets for girls revolution
While girls' toys have always been lucrative for toy makers (think Barbie, Cabbage Patch Kids, Care Bears and – more recently - Bratz), the market for technology-based toys has always been much more heavily aimed at boys.

 
© Lexur