|
X American Mathematical Society Commentary, Vol 46, No. 2 Letters to the Editor Impostures Intellectuelles and Faris's
Review I was very interested in the book review
article by William G. Faris of Impostures
Intellectuelles (Editions Odile Jacob, Paris, 1997) by
Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont in the August 1998 issue of the Notices (Vol. 45 pp. 874876). The reason for my interest is the
following point: "The major gap in the Sokal-Bricmont
book is that it avoids dealing with...the confusion over the
foundations of quantum mechanics. This confusion is a major weak point in
modern physical science. Numerous popular writings about
science exploit this obscurity, but the book does not address this
issue." To the best of my knowledge, no other
reviewer made this important point, and I suggest that this is a
grave omission by both the Sokal-Bricmont book and its numerous reviews. It is generally believed that
post-modernism was originated by culture studies in the revolutionary ambience of
1960s' France. But from which prior paradigms might the French
postmodernists have derived their (now rightly recognised as) daft ideas?
Might they have been influenced by the philosophical utterances of earlier
eminent mathematicians and scientists (mostly quantum physicists)? I have argued that this is indeed the
case. The following passages are conveniently taken from a single source,
Alan L. Mackay's A Dictionary of Scientific Quotations (Adam Hilger, Bristol,
1991): Niels Bohr: "...two sorts
of truth: trivialities, where opposites are obvi- ously absurd, and profound
truths, recognised by the fact that the oppo site is also a profound
truth." J. B. S. Haldane: "The
universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can
suppose." David Bohm: "There are no
things, only processes." Hermann Bondi: "[Science
doesn't deal with facts; indeed] fact is an emotion-loaded word for which
there is little place in scientific debate." Bertrand Russell:
"Mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are
talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true." G. H. Hardy: "Beauty is
the first test; there is no permanent place in the world for ugly
mathematics." Paul Dirac: "It is more
important to have beauty in one's equations than to have them fit
experiment." Arthur Eddington: "It is
also a good rule not to have overmuch confidence on the observational results
that are put forward until they are confirmed by theory." Albert Einstein:
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." Freeman Dyson: "Most of
the papers which are submitted to the Physical Review are rejected, not
because it is impossible to understand them, but because it is possible.
Those which are impossible to understand are usually published." Fred Hoyle: "[We must]
recognise ourselves for what we are-the priests of a not very popular
religion." Before any mathematicians and scientists
(and especially quantum physicists) dare to accuse any others of the very
serious charge of intellectual imposture, they first ought to put their own
houses in order. -Theo
Theocharis London, England (Received September 22, 1998 Revised October 7, 1998) |
|
Theocharis, “Where science has gone wrong”, Nature; http://www.ivorcatt.com/2817.htm |
|
x |