11–20 of 107 posts
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FFS take a few seconds and read the article. "Aaronson and O’Donnell both called Huang’s paper the “book” proof of the sensitivity conjecture, referring to Paul Erdős’ notion of a celestial book in which God writes the perfect proof of every theorem. " and read the article that sentence links to.
I think that's just another example of what OP is referring to. Erdős, a mathematician, invoked God.
Are we asking why some people in a largely Christian society refer to God as a concept?
That answer seems obvious.
Are we asking why some people playfully refer to quotes from famous people when giving praise?
Again, that seems obvious.
What, specifically, is being asked?
OP hasn’t shown that mathematicians refer to God any more often than society at large.
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
> Bernays observed that when a mathematician is at work she "naively" treats the objects she is dealing with in a platonistic way. Every working mathematician, he says, is a platonist (Bernays 1935).
I think that's why. There's a tendency to think of mathematical objects platonically. And given that it would be very odd if platonic, mathematical objects interacted causally with our universe, well, it's a short hop, skip, and a jump over to that meaning they're things a God made. And here I mean "God" in a root-of-all-things sense, not a Judeo-Christian or similar sense.
Also, I don't think you deserve the downvotes you're getting. There may be a tone of condescension, and there may not be. But there's a totally charitable way of interpreting that question -- you noting a trend that you perceive -- and that's how I took it.
[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
I think that would be because God is nature (for those who believe in God) and math is how humans describe nature. That would be the same as saying that nature can't be expressed in its own language any simpler than this.
My first thought was "who's the mathematician"? But the article doesn't actually mention the author's name until a few paragraphs down, electing instead to put the spotlight on Scott Aaronson and other commentators. I felt then as I do now that it was a little lacking in respect.
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
This mathematical "realm" is a very natural home for the variety of God a mathematician is likely to imagine.
Alternatively, if you like, God is one of the most powerful metaphors we as humans have.
“ I find it hard to imagine that even God knows how to prove the Sensitivity Conjecture in any simpler way than this.” Why is there a tendency to invoke God in math?
FFS take a few seconds and read the article. "Aaronson and O’Donnell both called Huang’s paper the “book” proof of the sensitivity conjecture, referring to Paul Erdős’ notion of a celestial book in which God writes the perfect proof of every theorem. " and read the article that sentence links to.
Please read the HN guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html