Part two of tonight´s Robot essay. Enjoy!
I would like to explore a case where something was once purely abstract and later became physically essential.
Excellent choice—these cases are some of the most compelling arguments for the idea that mathematics is not merely a human invention, but a kind of lens through which reality eventually becomes legible.
Let’s explore a few powerful examples where pure math led the way, and physics later caught up.
🔹 1. Riemannian Geometry → General Relativity
📐 The Math:
In 1854, Bernhard Riemann developed the idea of non-Euclidean geometry—a geometry in which the usual rules of flat space no longer apply.
This was a purely abstract exploration of what geometry might look like if space were curved.
It wasn’t meant to describe physical space—at the time, no one imagined space was anything but flat.
🌌 The Physics:
In 1915, Albert Einstein used Riemannian geometry to formulate General Relativity, which describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime.
A pure mathematical structure—once seen as philosophical curiosity—became the language of gravity and the structure of the universe.
🔹 2. Group Theory → Particle Physics
🔤 The Math:
Group theory was developed in the early 1800s by Évariste Galois to study solutions of algebraic equations. It was entirely abstract—concerning symmetries of mathematical objects.
No physical purpose was envisioned.
⚛️ The Physics:
In the 20th century, physicists discovered that elementary particles (like electrons, quarks, neutrinos) exhibit symmetry behavior that is perfectly described by group theory—especially Lie groups like SU(2), SU(3), and U(1).
These are the mathematical backbone of the Standard Model of particle physics.
The very structure of matter is governed by symmetries first studied for fun by mathematicians.
🔹 3. Fourier Analysis → Signal Processing & Quantum Mechanics
🎶 The Math:
Joseph Fourier introduced Fourier series in the early 1800s to solve heat flow problems—he showed that any function could be decomposed into sine and cosine waves.
This was a mathematically radical idea at the time, with no obvious broad application.
📡 The Physics and Technology:
Today, Fourier analysis is essential in:
Signal processing (radio, Wi-Fi, audio)
MRI machines
Quantum mechanics (wavefunction representations)
Fourier’s pure math became the language of waves, sound, vision, and quantum reality.
🔹 4. Number Theory → Cryptography
🔢 The Math:
For centuries, number theory—especially prime numbers, modular arithmetic, and elliptic curves—was seen as the “purest” branch of math. Hardy famously said it had “no practical application.”
🔐 The Technology:
Now it's the foundation of modern encryption:
RSA encryption uses properties of prime factorization.
Elliptic curve cryptography is widely used in secure communications, including blockchains.
Pure number theory became the guardian of digital privacy.
🔹 5. Topology → Quantum Field Theory & Condensed Matter Physics
🌀 The Math:
Topology is the study of properties preserved through stretching and twisting—like turning a donut into a coffee cup.
Once seen as bizarre abstraction (“a topologist can’t tell a donut from a mug”).
⚙️ The Physics:
In recent decades:
Topological quantum field theories help describe phases of matter (e.g., topological insulators, quantum Hall effect).
These concepts are being pursued for quantum computing.
Twisted shapes and holes in abstract space turn out to govern the behavior of electrons in exotic materials.
🧾 Meta-Level Reflection
Each of these cases reinforces a deep, somewhat eerie pattern:
Mathematicians explore a realm of pure thought... and later, physicists find that nature obeys it.
This can be interpreted in several ways:
As evidence for a Platonic realm (math is “real” and we’re discovering its truths),
As a kind of cosmic resonance (our minds evolved to track real patterns),
Or as the result of structural isomorphism between how we model the world and how the world behaves.
🧠 Want to Go Deeper?
Would you like:
A case study of a specific mathematical paper that later revolutionized science?
Exploration of how this links to Gödel, Penrose, and the idea of mathematical consciousness?
Or a counterexample—where abstract math hasn’t yet found any physical relevance?
Let me know!
Yes—many! There are vast regions of mathematics that, while internally consistent, elegant, and deeply studied, have no known application to the physical world. These are often cited in support of the view that math exceeds physical necessity, and that not all mathematics is “waiting” to be applied.
Here are some striking examples:
🔹 1. Large Cardinals in Set Theory
🧠 The Math:
Large cardinals are certain kinds of infinite sets so immense that they transcend even the infinite size of the real numbers.
They're used to explore the foundations of mathematics, such as the consistency of ZFC (Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory).
🚫 Physical Relevance:
No known physical system or theory requires (or even hints at) such enormous infinities.
These concepts lie far beyond anything in cosmology or quantum physics.
“There’s more infinity in math than in the universe.”
🔹 2. Monster Group and Sporadic Simple Groups
🧠 The Math:
The Monster group is a massive and complex algebraic object—one of the 26 “sporadic simple groups.” It has ~10⁵⁴ elements.
It was discovered through abstract symmetry considerations and has connections to other bizarre areas like modular functions.
🚫 Physical Relevance:
No current physical theory depends on or requires the Monster group.
Though “Monstrous Moonshine” revealed deep links to string theory math, these remain mathematical coincidences, not physical necessities.
We’ve found symmetries more elaborate than any seen in nature.
🔹 3. Higher-Dimensional Knot Theory
🧠 The Math:
While ordinary knot theory has applications (e.g., in DNA, fluid dynamics), mathematicians study knots in 4+ dimensions, such as 2-knots (spheres knotted in 4D space).
🚫 Physical Relevance:
No experiment or theory has yet observed or needed these structures.
3D knot theory is relevant to biology and chemistry; higher-knot theory remains pure math.
🔹 4. Grothendieck Topoi and Higher Category Theory
🧠 The Math:
Category theory is the study of abstract structures and relationships between mathematical objects. It’s been extended into n-categories, topoi, and even ∞-categories.
🚫 Physical Relevance:
While category theory has helped clarify aspects of quantum mechanics and logic, most higher-order forms are so abstract they remain unused outside of pure math.
“We build cathedrals of logic with no congregations in physics.”
🔹 5. p-adic Numbers and Analysis
🧠 The Math:
These are alternative number systems where numbers are evaluated by how divisible they are by a prime number (instead of by size).
p-adics have strange properties: in some, 1 + 1 + 1 + ... converges!
🚫 Physical Relevance:
A few attempts (in string theory and quantum mechanics) have been made to use p-adics—but they remain fringe.
For now, standard real and complex numbers dominate physics.
🔹 6. Exotic ℝ⁴ Structures
🧠 The Math:
Mathematicians discovered that 4-dimensional Euclidean space (ℝ⁴) has uncountably many smooth structures—ways to define "smoothness" that are not equivalent.
🚫 Physical Relevance:
No known physical system distinguishes or requires these exotic structures.
The space-time of general relativity uses only one (the standard one).
🧾 Summary Table
| Area of Math | Description | Physical Use? |
|---|---|---|
| Large cardinals | Huge infinities in set theory | ❌ None |
| Monster group | Enormous abstract symmetry group | ❌ None |
| Higher-dimensional knot theory | 2-knots, 4D+ knots | ❌ None |
| Grothendieck topoi / ∞-categories | High-level abstraction of structures | ❌ None |
| p-adic number systems | Alternate completions of ℚ | ⚠️ Minor/Speculative |
| Exotic ℝ⁴s | Strange smooth versions of ℝ⁴ | ❌ None |
🧠 Philosophical Implications
These examples are important for a few reasons:
They show that mathematical richness exceeds physical relevance—math may tap into structures that the physical world doesn’t require.
They challenge strong Platonism by suggesting some parts of “mathland” are purely human, or at least non-physical.
Or alternatively, they support Platonism even more deeply—maybe these structures are real, but the universe is only sampling a tiny fragment of the math that exists.
Would you like to dive into one of these examples in more depth? Or look at a case where something was abstract for a long time and only recently became physical (e.g., elliptic curves → cryptography)?
No comments:
Post a Comment