Dear Mohammed,
thanks for reading my essay. As I see we are agreeing in many points. But more importantly, I also think that math is an invention. Thanks for bringing your essay to my attention.I rate your essay high.
Best
Torsten
Dear Mohammed,
thanks for reading my essay. As I see we are agreeing in many points. But more importantly, I also think that math is an invention. Thanks for bringing your essay to my attention.I rate your essay high.
Best
Torsten
Dear Basem and Mohammed,
Your point is very well argued and reasonable, very close to the one by the great mathematician, physicist and thinker Henri Poincaré in Science and Hypothesis
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/37157/37157-pdf.pdf
"Rôle of Hypothesis.--Every generalisation is a hypothesis. Hypothesis therefore plays a necessary rôle, which no one has ever contested. Only, it should always be as soon as possible submitted to verification. It goes without saying that, if it cannot stand this test, it must be abandoned without any hesitation."
I am impressed by Poincaré's insight. In our time, physics is much more mathematical. I think that it is the result of a collective cognitive effort, may be an adaptation of our specie to an ever changing environment. I like the view of Vincent Douzal in this respect.
I had a pleasant reading and give you now my best appreciation.
If you have time, I created a dialogue about a topic of interest for mathematical physicists. I am curious to see if you will like it.
Best regards,
Michel
Dear Michel,
Thank you for your kind comments. I wasn't aware of Poincaré's book, but it seems very interesting, and I am glad our essay agrees with his ideas. I think that currently the main problem with theoretical physics is the wide gap between hypothesis and verification.
I have read your essay and I find it very interesting.
Best regards,
Mohammed
Dear Torsten,
Thank you very much for the kind comment and for the rating.
Best,
Mohammed
Dear Mohammed,
Congratulations, you are on the right way already gussing what matters, soon being involved in a great chapter of science.
All the best,
Michel
Hi,
You wrote me that you looked at my paper and I am very appreciative. I read your paper and I like it.
I wish you would work out some more of your idea that simplicity and beauty in physical theories can be understood from the computational complexity point of view. Has anyone else talked about this?
Thanks again!
All the best,
Noson Yanofsky
Dear Noson,
Thank you for reading our essay
In our article we suggest that we can use computational complexity as a measure of simplicity because we use computers today for almost all physical computations and simulations .Hence , it's reasonable to choose measure of simplicity relative to computers, I am not sure if anyone else talked about that.
All the best,
Basem
Dear Mohammed, Basem,
It is a well established fact that people will mostly speak of things that impress them, either good or bad. I couldn't agree more with your point that Wigner's speech is not shedding light on theories that have not worked as hoped. For every successful theory like relativity or quantum mechanics, there is a bunch of other theories that we know are wrong, like N=4 super Yang Mills or your SU(5) example. I like your idea of quantifying the elegance of a theory through the number of dependent variables and the relations between variables. It sounds like the most compact network model possible. Your arguments do a very good job getting the point across as well as your clear and enjoyable writing style.
Warm regards,
Alma
Hi Mohammed and Basem--
An absolutely brilliant essay. I concur fully with your analysis. In fact, your essay is so good that I'm glad I didn't write on your precise topic. You would have put me to shame. And, needless-to-say, I certainly agree with your last bullet on page 3.
I can't believe you two are only undergraduates. Your professors are lucky to have you. I predict shining futures for both of you. Keep up the good work!
Best regards and best of luck in the contest,
Bill.
Dear Basem and Mohammed,
Though I disagree with your instrumentalist perspective on physics and your antiplatonist view of mathematics, I am genuinely impressed by your eloquent defense of your positions. It is all the more impressive considering that, if I infer correctly, you are not even native English Speakers.
Despite our philosophical differences, there is much in your essay that I do concur with, especially the notion that observation and experiment trumps any other consideration in science.
Your ideas about quantifying aesthetic notions like beauty are interesting and deserve more detailed treatment.Finally, I could not agree more with your last paragraph as my own research effort is geared precisely to developing new mathematics that helps us model and especially understand fundamental aspects of reality.
Overall, you did a great job
Best wishes,
Armin
Dear Alma,
Thank you very much for your kind and encouraging words. I agree with you about wrong theories like N=4 super Yang Mills. We suggested using computational complexity as a measure of simplicity because we use computers today for almost all physical computations and simulations. Hence, it's reasonable to choose measure of simplicity relative to computations.
Kind regards,
Mohammed
Dear William,
Thank you very much for your kind and encouraging words. I am glad you liked our essay. From your essay, I am sure you would have done a better job if you wrote about that topic.
All the best,
Mohammed
Dear Armin,
Thank you very much for your interesting comments. I respect your opinion about the Platonist view, and I am glad you concur with other points.
Indeed the importance of experiments and observations in science cannot be overstressed. I think that currently the main problem with theoretical physics is the wide gap between theory and experiment.
Finally, I am glad to know that you are working on developing new mathematics for better modelling reality.
Best wishes,
Mohammed
Dear Mohammed,
Thank you for your kind remarks on my essay and I enjoyed reading yours as well. As you know, we agree on many points. It's very true that many theories which were considered beautiful or simple ended up failing to explain observations and experimental data. I liked your discussion on simplicity and computational complexity, and on how the same phenomenon can be described with different mathematical formulations. You present throughout a very interesting essay, and I rate it highly.
Kind regards,
Steve Sax
Dear Steven,
Thank you for your kind words on our essay. I am glad you enjoyed reading it, and that you agree with us in many points.
Best regards,
Mohammed