Joel David Hamkins: Philosophy of mathematics and truth

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 22

  • @whitb62
    @whitb62 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Best interview I’ve seen of Hamkins, who I really like. Great questions.

    • @MatthewGeleta
      @MatthewGeleta  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks. I’m a big fan too - he’s both a brilliant thinker, and an absolutely lovely person

  • @electric7309
    @electric7309 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
    00:00 🤖 The Nature of Existence in Mathematics
    - Mathematics deals with abstract objects.
    - Abstract existence in mathematics is distinct from physical existence.
    - The challenge of causal interaction with abstract mathematical concepts.
    04:52 🤯 Causality and Abstract Existence
    - The problem of causal interaction with the abstract realm.
    - The debate over whether causality flows between the physical and abstract realms.
    - Barbara Montero's perspective on the issue.
    07:23 🌌 Abstract vs. Physical Existence
    - The concept that physical existence is more mysterious and less clear than abstract existence.
    - The idea that physical existence, when examined deeply, becomes more incoherent and mysterious.
    - Satisfactory accounts of abstract existence compared to the nature of physical existence.
    09:18 🤔 Intuition and Objective Truth
    - The role of intuition in determining the truth value of a statement.
    - The challenge of mistaking intuitive truth for objective truth.
    - The connection between abstract and intuitive truth.
    12:16 📚 Understanding the Notion of Proof
    - Different views on what constitutes a mathematical proof.
    - The distinction between formal proofs and informal arguments.
    - The use of formal proofs to understand the nature of proof itself.
    19:10 🧩 Turing Machines and Understanding Computation
    - Turing machines as a theoretical model for understanding computation.
    - The utility of studying Turing machines for understanding the nature of computation.
    - The parallel between Turing machines and formal proofs in mathematics.
    22:20 📜 From Turing Machines to Completeness Theorem
    - Gödel's Completeness Theorem and its connection to formal theories.
    - The concept of logical consequences and the role of proof.
    - The profound implications of the Completeness Theorem for verifiability in mathematics.
    24:25 🧠 Philosophy of mathematics and the Completeness Theorem
    - Joel discusses the Completeness Theorem's profound implications for mathematics.
    - The Completeness Theorem states that if a statement is true in all mathematical structures where a particular theory holds, there is a proof for it.
    - Completeness Theorem connects formal proofs to semantic models.
    29:24 🤔 Perceptions of Incompleteness
    - The discussion shifts to the Incompleteness Theorem and how it is perceived.
    - Some may view incompleteness as a problem, but Joel sees it as a fundamental feature of mathematical reality.
    - Incompleteness leads to the creation of a hierarchy of theories, expanding mathematical exploration.
    36:26 🏗️ Building Hierarchy of Consistency Theories
    - Joel explains the hierarchy of consistency theories and its significance.
    - This hierarchy reveals that even foundational theories like Peano arithmetic can't prove their own consistency.
    - Mathematics has become highly specialized and too vast for any single person to master it entirely.
    47:54 🧮 The Axiom of Choice in Mathematics
    - Axiom of choice, a fundamental concept in mathematics.
    - Discussion about the role of axioms and their intrinsic and extrinsic justifications.
    50:09 🤔 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Justifications for Axioms
    - Exploring the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic justification of axioms.
    - Intrinsic justification based on fundamental intuition, extrinsic justification based on consequences.
    58:00 🤷‍♂️ Choosing Areas of Research in Pure Mathematics
    - The consideration of personal interest and curiosity as the primary criteria for mathematical research.
    - The discussion of mathematicians' choices of topics in pure mathematics and their intrinsic appeal.
    01:08:07 🌟 Pursuing Unconventional Mathematical Questions
    - The importance of following personal interest even in non-mainstream or quirky areas of mathematics.
    - Examples of pursuing unconventional mathematical questions, leading to valuable discoveries.
    - Encouragement to ignore advice against pursuing topics of interest.
    01:10:10 🌟 The Value of Abstract Mathematical Questions
    - Abstract mathematical questions may lack immediate practical applications.
    - Mathematicians often pursue such questions because of their intrinsic value.
    - The progress in understanding these questions contributes to cultural advancement.
    01:15:37 🧠 Motivations and Evolution of Human Minds
    - Human minds are naturally drawn to abstract questions due to their cognitive constitution.
    - The pursuit of abstract mathematical questions can be motivated by curiosity and play.
    - The analogy of children drawn to a candy aisle illustrates the impulsive nature of our interests.
    01:19:31 📚 Serialization of "The Book of Infinity"
    - Joel started a substack and serialized a book titled "The Book of Infinity" for an undergraduate class.
    - The book covers various mathematical conundrums, paradoxes, puzzles, and historical examples.
    - Joel also mentions other book projects he's serializing on his substack, such as "Panorama of Logic" and "Math for Seven-Year-Olds."
    01:22:04 🌌 AI Superintelligence and Choosing a Representative
    - Discussing the concept of AI superintelligence and selecting a representative for humanity.
    - Emphasizing that the smartest person may not necessarily be the best representative.
    - Reflecting on a humorous story illustrating the importance of asking the right question.
    Made with HARPA AI

    • @sheidak.2347
      @sheidak.2347 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you, this is very helpful!

  • @jcsahnwaldt
    @jcsahnwaldt 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Minor correction: 20:24 The "wobbly table theorem" is about a table with four legs (not three), the legs must have equal length, and the surface has to be continuous (but not necessarily flat).

    • @MatthewGeleta
      @MatthewGeleta  4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks. Mathologer has a video on it: th-cam.com/video/aCj3qfQ68m0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Q680kHaDrYmwXTCd

  • @karelfrielink4300
    @karelfrielink4300 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Great conversation!

  • @johnbova8278
    @johnbova8278 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I really wanted the discussion at 36:20 to be, "Is *completeness* a problem?" Answer: yes! (Alas, it's just a misprint for, "Is incompleteness a problem?")

  • @jakecarlo9950
    @jakecarlo9950 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    In about two minutes and 20 seconds, the speaker mentions an author, but I wasn’t able to understand the name. Does the channel know what it is?

    • @joeldavidhamkins5484
      @joeldavidhamkins5484 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      It was Paul Benacerraf and his famous articles on the philosophy of mathematics: "What Numbers Could Not Be" (1965) and "Mathematical Truth" (1973).

    • @MatthewGeleta
      @MatthewGeleta  ปีที่แล้ว +4

      I've added this to the show notes: www.jstor.org/stable/2183530

    • @jakecarlo9950
      @jakecarlo9950 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@joeldavidhamkins5484 Thanks very much sir!

  • @oldsachem
    @oldsachem ปีที่แล้ว

    Do numbers live and then die? How many times? Do they mutate over time? Can one conceive of time without number or math at the same time?

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Sure. Why not?

  • @almightysapling
    @almightysapling ปีที่แล้ว

    If you look at proofs solely as the results that they prove, then the "tower of consistency" does indeed look a lot like hole plugging. However, when we do this, we are really investigating the nature of consequence/derivation itself and not so much the direct results we get from any individual "plug".

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Inevitably. The "metaplug"😊

  • @dosomething3
    @dosomething3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    wow 😮😮😮

  • @almightysapling
    @almightysapling ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Humans didn't evolve to do mathematics? Disagree quite strongly. We evolved. We do mathematics.
    For whatever reason, our brain structure allows us to do calculus. So does a dragonfly's. Don't put humanity on a pedestal.

    • @MatthewGeleta
      @MatthewGeleta  ปีที่แล้ว

      You are correct and I modify my framing as: our minds are not well optimised for doing maths

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Humans didn't evolve to have appendicitis by possessing a useless appendix. But some do get appendicitis so we did evolve to possess a useless appendix. (Duh.)

    • @James-ll3jb
      @James-ll3jb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@MatthewGeletaI don't think that is his actual intention Matthew, which is to assert (albeit lamely) that our brains HAVE evolved sufficiently to perform a feat e.g. calculus. (I leave the facticity of assertions like "dragonflys can 'do' calculus" to the comical "Glorys Of Science" propagandists😅