Is Max Tegmark really a minority of one?

  • Thread starter bostonnew
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Max
In summary, the conversation discusses the speaker's newfound worldview that all human interpretations of mathematics are flawed and the idea of "shut up and calculate" as a way to understand the universe. They also inquire about other contemporary thinkers who share this perspective. The conversation also touches on the importance of understanding cause and effect in relation to Godel's work.
  • #1
bostonnew
42
0
Hi all,

I've spent some time studying the different interpretations of quantum mechanics and have come to the conclusions that none of them really make sense to me. Which made me think that that in itself actually makes sense as I'm just an African ape whose brain certainly didn't evolve in order to understand the deeper laws of nature.

My newfound worldview is therefore that of Max Tegmark: All human interpretations of mathematics are bound to be flawed, because they are developed by humans. So if we want to understand the universe we should just "shut up and calculate", as his paper goes.

Now, since this line of reasoning is so sensible to me, I'm curious as to which other contemporary philosophers, mathematicians, or phycisists share this world view.

Can you guys help me identify them? Or is Tegmark really a minority of one, as he claims?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
bostonnew said:
I'm just an African ape whose brain certainly didn't evolve in order to understand the deeper laws of nature.

I'm not saying you meant it this way, but when I first read this, I thought it was an insult to Africans.
 
  • #3
"Shut up and calculate", I like that.
 
  • #4
bostonnew said:
Hi all,

I've spent some time studying the different interpretations of quantum mechanics and have come to the conclusions that none of them really make sense to me. Which made me think that that in itself actually makes sense as I'm just an African ape whose brain certainly didn't evolve in order to understand the deeper laws of nature.

My newfound worldview is therefore that of Max Tegmark: All human interpretations of mathematics are bound to be flawed, because they are developed by humans. So if we want to understand the universe we should just "shut up and calculate", as his paper goes.

Now, since this line of reasoning is so sensible to me, I'm curious as to which other contemporary philosophers, mathematicians, or phycisists share this world view.

Can you guys help me identify them? Or is Tegmark really a minority of one, as he claims?

Thanks!

If you care to have this inherently atheistic, Feynman approach where we are Nature's slaves lucky to even understand simple harmonic motion, then I'm not surprised you'd have this shut-up-and-calculate mentality. The fact of the matter is, we have come a long way from ancient times in that we have produced meaningful findings about, say, other dimensions (that we can neither directly experience or relate to), yet which we still can put some type of quantitative leash around. So, are we just speck of stardust waiting for Nature to spare us answers? Not exactly. Now, back to my original point, I, for one, believe that there is importance in the deeper meaning behind statements about cause and effect (whether about physics, or any other subject for that matter) that are deeply connected with Godel's work.

So, if you ask me, the shut-up-and-think alternative is much more meaningful.
 
  • #5
Please read the rules which are at the top of this forum. This thread does not meet posting requirements for this forum.
 

Related to Is Max Tegmark really a minority of one?

1. Is Max Tegmark the only scientist who believes in the concept of a multiverse?

No, there are other scientists who also believe in the existence of a multiverse. However, Max Tegmark's specific interpretation of the multiverse theory, known as the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis, is considered to be a minority viewpoint among scientists.

2. What is the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis?

The Mathematical Universe Hypothesis proposes that the entire physical reality of our universe is ultimately made up of mathematical structures. In other words, everything in the universe, including us, is essentially just a mathematical structure.

3. What evidence supports Max Tegmark's theory?

There is currently no direct evidence to support the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis. Tegmark's theory is based on the idea that the laws of physics are mathematical in nature, and that our universe is just one of many possible mathematical structures. However, this is still a highly debated and controversial idea in the scientific community.

4. Why is Max Tegmark's theory considered a minority viewpoint?

Max Tegmark's theory is not widely accepted among scientists because it is a highly speculative and untestable idea. It also goes against the current understanding of the universe and the laws of physics. Many scientists believe that the multiverse theory is still just a theoretical concept and not supported by concrete evidence.

5. How does Max Tegmark's theory impact our understanding of the universe?

If Tegmark's theory were to be proven true, it would completely change our understanding of the universe and our place in it. It would mean that the universe is fundamentally mathematical and that there are potentially infinite other universes with their own unique mathematical structures. However, until there is concrete evidence to support this theory, it remains just one of many possible explanations for the nature of our universe.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
108
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
982
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
3
Replies
72
Views
7K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
4K
Back
Top