In article <41238$480c4cf1$82a1e228$6554@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Virgil wrote:
>
> > In article <41368$480700d8$82a1e228$24194@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >>Han de Bruijn wrote:
> >>
> >>>Mathematics is two things: the ART of creating ideas, and the SCIENCE
of
> >>>applying those ideas to real world material.
> >>
> >>Ah, forgot one thing: the DISCIPLINE to _reject_ ideas if it turns out
> >>that these ideas cannot appliccable. The discipline is the hardest
part,
> >>for groups as well as for individuals.
> >>
> >>So Mathematics is three things: the ART of creating ideas, the SCIENCE
> >>of applying these ideas to real world material, and the DISCIPLINE to
> >>reject ideas for which it's is evident that they cannot be matched to
> >>any real world material.
> >
> > However, one must be careful in mathematics not to apply that
rejection
> > discipline too soon, as some developments in mathematics which
> > eventually proved to be of great use in the real world were for a long
> > time thought to be quite useless in that real world, and even valued
> > more highly for that reason.
> >
> > It is typical of both pure and applied mathematicians to undervalue
the
> > others worth.
>
> Uhm, I was thinking along the lines of rejecting Phlogiston and Ether as
> useless ideas. But suppose these were not mathematical ..
>
> Han de Bruijn
They were neither of them totally useless, as investigating whether they
were "true" lead to advances.
Even the worst of scientific theories can be useful by serving as bad
examples.
|
