The smell of the Moon by Jeffrey Michael Schmitz

Dear Jeff,

Thank you for not reporting to Fqxi.org that my comment was inappropriate and by doing so have the Administrator classify it as Obnoxious Spam and remove it.

Joe Fisher

Dear Jeff,

You begin by noting just what a strange and limited language is mathematics, with examples 'pass the salt' and 'watch out', etc. Your examples of Roman versus Arabic numerals somewhat parallels Donald Palmer's essay, where he points out that modern science and technology would not be feasible (possible?) without the decimal number system. Typically the actual numeric system in use is glossed over.

I fully agree that counting (the physical implementation of Peano Axioms) leads to mathematics, producing the natural numbers and, per Kronecker, allowing man to build 'all the rest' of math. In my essay I elaborate on 'counters as key'. In one comment you ask "could counting exist without logic?" You seem to think yes, but in my essay I tend to think no. I view 'logic' not as mathematical argument, but as the basic fact of nature that allows AND and NOT gates to exist at every scale as fundamental physical structure, whether implemented at the level of protein, neuron, or silicon.

What I really enjoyed was your speculation about "language" in terms of other species or senses, from echolocation to dog's sense of smell. You make a fascinating point, re dogs use of 'smell' to communicate 'Moon', that "the Moon does not have a smell, but Democrat and Republican states are not actually red and blue."

Also like your statement "science cannot find truth, but can find understanding, and failure is an important tool in understanding."

I invite you to read my essay and welcome your comments.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

A maestro in depicting the ideas on to the paper.

Great work!

-Sincerely,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Hi Jeff--

I enjoyed reading your essay. You must have the best title of any essay in the contest. It is humorous and yet perfectly coveys the point of your message. Your distinction between mathematical and physical proof is exactly correct, in my opinion. As for non-logical communications, my guess is that's what Madhyamaka Buddhists (and others) think that they are doing when they meditate.

All-in-all, congratulations!

Best regards,

Bill.

actually I had commented naturally, but the compliment to you in your view actually happened it to be a prank!

Which I think a "real" april fool to you!

- Best Regards,

Miss. Sujatha Jagannathan

Dear Michael,

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

Jeff,

Thank you for your kind words, but especially for seriously reading my essay.

Jim

Jeff

Thanks for your kind comments on my essay. Reading yours I can see you're a perceptive 'out of the bigger box' thinker. I particularly liked;

'Mathematics 聽requires 聽your 聽trust 聽to 聽function. 聽It 聽is 聽up 聽to 聽you 聽to 聽decide 聽if 聽you 聽are 聽being 聽conned.'

'Science 聽cannot 聽find 聽truth, 聽but 聽can 聽find 聽understanding 聽and 聽failure 聽is 聽an 聽important 聽tool 聽in 聽understanding.' 聽

'It 聽is 聽hard 聽to 聽image 聽physics 聽without 聽mathematics,聽but 聽examples are all 聽around 聽us'

'If we wish to understand what the Moon is like we want to see pictures'

I find 3D pictures to be of massive importance, containing and rationalising great complexity and also highly memorable, adding motion is a multiplier. My video in an exercise in compresses 10 volumes of explanations and calculations into 9 minutes (though should be 30!) And yes; it's important new physics!

I also liked you reminder that Arabic numerals are not the only way of describing cardinalisation. I quite like the Mayan system, of simple symbols (dashes etc) where relative 'position' dictates function. When people get too pedantic about maths as the 'only' language of physics I sometimes compare the manipulations of ancient Arabic symbols we use to Tarot cards. If poorly used they can have equal meaning as descriptors of m natures mechanisms!

Anyway very well done. Shame it seems it won't be in the finalists even after my score.

Peter