An Argument Against the Platonic World

 Pierre Curie (1894): “Asymmetry is what creates a phenomenon.”

 Against symmetry,  is what constitutes time as a measure. So there is this argument in there too.:)

My aim in this essay is to propose a conception of mathematics that is fully consonant with naturalism. By that I mean the hypothesis that everything that exists is part of the natural world, which makes up a unitary whole. This is in contradiction with the Platonic view of mathematics held by many physicists and mathematicians according to which, mathematical truths are facts about mathematical objects which exist in a separate, timeless realm of reality, which exists apart from and in addition to physical reality. -A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physics

 The point I think I am making, is that in issuance of any position, any idea has to emerge from an a prior state in order for the "unitary whole" to be fully understood? Timeless, becomes an illogical position, since any idea in itself becomes an "asymmetrical view" as a product of the phenomenal world. Symmetry then implies, a need for, and a better description of the unitary whole.

There is a constant theme that I observed with Lee Smolin regarding the effectiveness of the idea about what the Platonic world means in face of being a realist of the natural world. So in one stroke,  if we could but eliminate the question about the Platonic world of forms,  would we see that Platonism is a duelist of nature, and not a realist of the kind that exists as a product of the natural world. But more then this, the idea somehow that the platonic world is a timeless truth about our existence.

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences by Eugene Wigner

The great mathematician fully, almost ruthlessly, exploits the domain of permissible reasoning and skirts the impermissible. That recklessness does not lead him into a morass of contradictions is a miracle in itself: certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin's process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess. However, this is not our present subject. The principal point which will have to be recalled later is that the mathematician could formulate only a handful of interesting theorems without defining concepts beyond those contained in the axioms and that the concepts outside those contained in the axioms are defined with a view of permitting ingenious logical operations which appeal to our aesthetic sense both as operations and also in their results of great generality and simplicity.

[3 M. Polanyi, in his Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1958), says: "All these difficulties are but consequences of our
refusal to see that mathematics cannot be defined without acknowledging
its most obvious feature: namely, that it is interesting" (p 188).]

So you can see that I attain one end of the argument,  against being a naturalist,  given I hold to views about the Platonic world? Against FXQi, and its awarding program regarding the selection of the subject as an awardee, if I counter Lee's perspective?

There are many other classes of things that are evoked. There are forms of poetry and music that have rigid rules which define vast or countably infinite sets of possible realizations. They were invented, it is absurd to think that haiku or the blues existed before particular people made the first one. Once defined there are many discoveries to be made exploring the landscape of possible realizations of the rules. A master may experience the senses of discovery, beauty and wonder, but these are not arguments for the prior or timeless existence of the art form independent of human creativity.  See:  A naturalist account of the limited, and hence reasonable, effectiveness of mathematics in physicsBy Lee Smolin

I have my own views about what constitutes what a naturalist is in face of what Lee Smolin grants it to be in face of the argument regarding what is an false as an argument about what is invented or discovered.  So of course,  full and foremost, what is a naturalist?

But again,  let us be reminded of the poet or the artist,

Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty, a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show. The true spirit of delight, the exaltation, the sense of being more than Man, which is the touchstone of the highest excellence, is to be found in mathematics as surely as in poetry. --BERTRAND RUSSELL, Study of Mathematics

***

You see, Lee Smolin's argument regarding naturalism falls apart when we consider the context of the nature of the quasi-crystal given,  we understand the nature of the quasi-crystal signature? It is necessary to understand this history.



See Also:

• The Truth of Symmetry 
• The Form of the Good
• Foundations of Mathematics

Dr. Duncan MacDougall's Idea

I had done this title before under a different heading, in a different time. The subject seems to have been resurrected by Discovery Magazine and thought it worth bringing up here so you get an idea here of the dilemma I faced regarding the substantial weight of things?

A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks  should be. -Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

Einstein,  was a materialist?

If one has followed my blog postings over the years the idea here is not that I had solely uprooted the essence of the question about substance and the weight of things, but to show the complexity of the idea that points to the hereafter. These, as beliefs retained by a large swath of the population on this planet.

The title(of Blog post) refers to the early 20th-century research of physician Dr. Duncan MacDougall who attempted to show scientific proof of the existence of the immortal human soul by recording a loss of body weight (representing the departure of the soul) immediately following death. The research by MacDougall attempted to follow the scientific method and showed some variance in results ("three-fourths of an ounce", which has since been popularized as "21 grams" is the reported weight loss from the death of the first subject). MacDougall's results were published in the peer reviewed journal "American Medicine".[4] - 21 Grams

*** 

NYT article from March 11, 1907
Duncan MacDougall (doctor)

***

Do you think that these abstractions, these mental journeys, are all of it? No but it is on the road to the understanding and discovery of what Plato meant by his heaven. It is not about the patriarchal view that as a messenger, that we gain, but by the exploratory adventure given toward the discovery of what that heaven may mean. Pierre Curie(forgive me)mentions that any phenomena is the discovery of asymmetry? The message helps to provide clarity to the ongoing seeking issue of understanding reality and understanding consciousness? What is that understanding?

      Pierre Curie (1894): “Asymmetry is what creates a phenomenon.”

Plato wasn't wrong about his attempt at a fundamental understanding and the way he went about it. It isn't just about the architecture of matter......but of the progression toward an understanding of what can be done with our imagination when we send it far off in space, or look into the very nature of the sun. Do you think relevant questions you may have is not the next step to what answer is received?
    

   Aperiodic tilings serve as mathematical models for quasicrystals, physical solids that were discovered in 1982 by Dan Shechtman[3] who subsequently won the Nobel prize in 2011.[4] However, the specific local structure of these materials is still poorly understood .Aperiodic tilings -

***

See Also:

• The Soul=λόγος,θυμος,ἔρως
• The Man Who Tried to Weigh the Soul - The Crux