8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

ReadingMaterials
TheUnreasonableEffectivenessofMathematicsin
theNaturalSciences
byEugeneWigner
"TheUnreasonableEffectivenessofMathematicsintheNaturalSciences,"inCommunicationsinPure
andAppliedMathematics,vol.13,No.I(February1960).NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.
Copyright1960byJohnWiley&Sons,Inc.
Mathematics,rightlyviewed,possessesnotonlytruth,butsupremebeautyabeautycold
andaustere,likethatofsculpture,withoutappealtoanypartofourweakernature,without
thegorgeoustrappingsofpaintingormusic,yetsublimelypure,andcapableofastern
perfectionsuchasonlythegreatestartcanshow.Thetruespiritofdelight,theexaltation,
thesenseofbeingmorethanMan,whichisthetouchstoneofthehighestexcellence,isto
befoundinmathematicsassurelyasinpoetry.
BERTRANDRUSSELL,StudyofMathematics
THEREISAstoryabouttwofriends,whowereclassmatesinhighschool,talkingabouttheir
jobs.Oneofthembecameastatisticianandwasworkingonpopulationtrends.Heshoweda
reprinttohisformerclassmate.Thereprintstarted,asusual,withtheGaussiandistribution
andthestatisticianexplainedtohisformerclassmatethemeaningofthesymbolsforthe
actualpopulation,fortheaveragepopulation,andsoon.Hisclassmatewasabitincredulous
andwasnotquitesurewhetherthestatisticianwaspullinghisleg."Howcanyouknowthat?"
washisquery."Andwhatisthissymbolhere?""Oh,"saidthestatistician,"thisispi.""Whatis
that?""Theratioofthecircumferenceofthecircletoitsdiameter.""Well,nowyouarepushing
yourjoketoofar,"saidtheclassmate,"surelythepopulationhasnothingtodowiththe
circumferenceofthecircle."
Naturally,weareinclinedtosmileaboutthesimplicityoftheclassmate'sapproach.
Nevertheless,whenIheardthisstory,Ihadtoadmittoaneeriefeelingbecause,surely,the
reactionoftheclassmatebetrayedonlyplaincommonsense.Iwasevenmoreconfused
when,notmanydayslater,someonecametomeandexpressedhisbewilderment[1The
remarktobequotedwasmadebyF.WernerwhenhewasastudentinPrinceton.]withthefactthat
wemakearathernarrowselectionwhenchoosingthedataonwhichwetestourtheories.
"Howdoweknowthat,ifwemadeatheorywhichfocusesitsattentiononphenomenawe
disregardanddisregardssomeofthephenomenanowcommandingourattention,thatwe
couldnotbuildanothertheorywhichhaslittleincommonwiththepresentonebutwhich,
nevertheless,explainsjustasmanyphenomenaasthepresenttheory?"Ithastobeadmitted
thatwehavenodefiniteevidencethatthereisnosuchtheory.
Theprecedingtwostoriesillustratethetwomainpointswhicharethesubjectsofthepresent
discourse.Thefirstpointisthatmathematicalconceptsturnupinentirelyunexpected
connections.Moreover,theyoftenpermitanunexpectedlycloseandaccuratedescriptionof
thephenomenaintheseconnections.Secondly,justbecauseofthiscircumstance,and
becausewedonotunderstandthereasonsoftheirusefulness,wecannotknowwhethera

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

1/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

theoryformulatedintermsofmathematicalconceptsisuniquelyappropriate.Weareina
positionsimilartothatofamanwhowasprovidedwithabunchofkeysandwho,havingto
openseveraldoorsinsuccession,alwayshitontherightkeyonthefirstorsecondtrial.He
becameskepticalconcerningtheuniquenessofthecoordinationbetweenkeysanddoors.
Mostofwhatwillbesaidonthesequestionswillnotbenewithasprobablyoccurredtomost
scientistsinoneformoranother.Myprincipalaimistoilluminateitfromseveralsides.The
firstpointisthattheenormoususefulnessofmathematicsinthenaturalsciencesis
somethingborderingonthemysteriousandthatthereisnorationalexplanationforit.
Second,itisjustthisuncannyusefulnessofmathematicalconceptsthatraisesthequestion
oftheuniquenessofourphysicaltheories.Inordertoestablishthefirstpoint,that
mathematicsplaysanunreasonablyimportantroleinphysics,itwillbeusefultosayafew
wordsonthequestion,"Whatismathematics?",then,"Whatisphysics?",then,how
mathematicsentersphysicaltheories,andlast,whythesuccessofmathematicsinitsrolein
physicsappearssobaffling.Muchlesswillbesaidonthesecondpoint:theuniquenessof
thetheoriesofphysics.Aproperanswertothisquestionwouldrequireelaborate
experimentalandtheoreticalworkwhichhasnotbeenundertakentodate.
WHATISMATHEMATICS?
Somebodyoncesaidthatphilosophyisthemisuseofaterminologywhichwasinventedjust
forthispurpose.[2ThisstatementisquotedherefromW.Dubislav'sDiePhilosophiederMathematik
inderGegenwart(Berlin:JunkerandDunnhauptVerlag,1932),p.1.]Inthesamevein,Iwouldsay
thatmathematicsisthescienceofskillfuloperationswithconceptsandrulesinventedjustfor
thispurpose.Theprincipalemphasisisontheinventionofconcepts.Mathematicswould
soonrunoutofinterestingtheoremsifthesehadtobeformulatedintermsoftheconcepts
whichalreadyappearintheaxioms.Furthermore,whereasitisunquestionablytruethatthe
conceptsofelementarymathematicsandparticularlyelementarygeometrywereformulated
todescribeentitieswhicharedirectlysuggestedbytheactualworld,thesamedoesnotseem
tobetrueofthemoreadvancedconcepts,inparticulartheconceptswhichplaysuchan
importantroleinphysics.Thus,therulesforoperationswithpairsofnumbersareobviously
designedtogivethesameresultsastheoperationswithfractionswhichwefirstlearned
withoutreferenceto"pairsofnumbers."Therulesfortheoperationswithsequences,thatis,
withirrationalnumbers,stillbelongtothecategoryofruleswhichweredeterminedsoasto
reproducerulesfortheoperationswithquantitieswhichwerealreadyknowntous.Mostmore
advancedmathematicalconcepts,suchascomplexnumbers,algebras,linearoperators,
Borelsetsandthislistcouldbecontinuedalmostindefinitelyweresodevisedthattheyare
aptsubjectsonwhichthemathematiciancandemonstratehisingenuityandsenseofformal
beauty.Infact,thedefinitionoftheseconcepts,witharealizationthatinterestingand
ingeniousconsiderationscouldbeappliedtothem,isthefirstdemonstrationofthe
ingeniousnessofthemathematicianwhodefinesthem.Thedepthofthoughtwhichgoesinto
theformulationofthemathematicalconceptsislaterjustifiedbytheskillwithwhichthese
conceptsareused.Thegreatmathematicianfully,almostruthlessly,exploitsthedomainof
permissiblereasoningandskirtstheimpermissible.Thathisrecklessnessdoesnotleadhim
intoamorassofcontradictionsisamiracleinitself:certainlyitishardtobelievethatour
reasoningpowerwasbrought,byDarwin'sprocessofnaturalselection,totheperfection
whichitseemstopossess.However,thisisnotourpresentsubject.Theprincipalpointwhich
willhavetoberecalledlateristhatthemathematiciancouldformulateonlyahandfulof
interestingtheoremswithoutdefiningconceptsbeyondthosecontainedintheaxiomsand
thattheconceptsoutsidethosecontainedintheaxiomsaredefinedwithaviewofpermitting

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

2/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

ingeniouslogicaloperationswhichappealtoouraestheticsensebothasoperationsand
alsointheirresultsofgreatgeneralityandsimplicity.[3M.Polanyi,inhisPersonalKnowledge
(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1958),says:"Allthesedifficultiesarebutconsequencesofour
refusaltoseethatmathematicscannotbedefinedwithoutacknowledgingitsmostobviousfeature:
namely,thatitisinteresting"(p188).]
Thecomplexnumbersprovideaparticularlystrikingexamplefortheforegoing.Certainly,
nothinginourexperiencesuggeststheintroductionofthesequantities.Indeed,ifa
mathematicianisaskedtojustifyhisinterestincomplexnumbers,hewillpoint,withsome
indignation,tothemanybeautifultheoremsinthetheoryofequations,ofpowerseries,andof
analyticfunctionsingeneral,whichowetheirorigintotheintroductionofcomplexnumbers.
Themathematicianisnotwillingtogiveuphisinterestinthesemostbeautiful
accomplishmentsofhisgenius.[4Thereadermaybeinterested,inthisconnection,inHilbert's
rathertestyremarksaboutintuitionismwhich"seekstobreakupandtodisfiguremathematics,"Abh.
Math.Sem.,Univ.Hamburg,157(1922),orGesammelteWerke(Berlin:Springer,1935),p.188.]
WHATISPHYSICS?
Thephysicistisinterestedindiscoveringthelawsofinanimatenature.Inordertounderstand
thisstatement,itisnecessarytoanalyzetheconcept,"lawofnature."
Theworldaroundusisofbafflingcomplexityandthemostobviousfactaboutitisthatwe
cannotpredictthefuture.Althoughthejokeattributesonlytotheoptimisttheviewthatthe
futureisuncertain,theoptimistisrightinthiscase:thefutureisunpredictable.Itis,as
Schrodingerhasremarked,amiraclethatinspiteofthebafflingcomplexityoftheworld,
certainregularitiesintheeventscouldbediscovered.Onesuchregularity,discoveredby
Galileo,isthattworocks,droppedatthesametimefromthesameheight,reachthegroundat
thesametime.Thelawsofnatureareconcernedwithsuchregularities.Galileo'sregularityis
aprototypeofalargeclassofregularities.Itisasurprisingregularityforthreereasons.
ThefirstreasonthatitissurprisingisthatitistruenotonlyinPisa,andinGalileo'stime,itis
trueeverywhereontheEarth,wasalwaystrue,andwillalwaysbetrue.Thispropertyofthe
regularityisarecognizedinvariancepropertyand,asIhadoccasiontopointoutsometime
ago,withoutinvarianceprinciplessimilartothoseimpliedintheprecedinggeneralizationof
Galileo'sobservation,physicswouldnotbepossible.Thesecondsurprisingfeatureisthat
theregularitywhichwearediscussingisindependentofsomanyconditionswhichcould
haveaneffectonit.Itisvalidnomatterwhetheritrainsornot,whethertheexperimentis
carriedoutinaroomorfromtheLeaningTower,nomatterwhetherthepersonwhodropsthe
rocksisamanorawoman.Itisvalidevenifthetworocksaredropped,simultaneouslyand
fromthesameheight,bytwodifferentpeople.Thereare,obviously,innumerableother
conditionswhichareallimmaterialfromthepointofviewofthevalidityofGalileo'sregularity.
Theirrelevancyofsomanycircumstanceswhichcouldplayaroleinthephenomenon
observedhasalsobeencalledaninvariance.However,thisinvarianceisofadifferent
characterfromtheprecedingonesinceitcannotbeformulatedasageneralprinciple.The
explorationoftheconditionswhichdo,andwhichdonot,influenceaphenomenonispartof
theearlyexperimentalexplorationofafield.Itistheskillandingenuityoftheexperimenter
whichshowhimphenomenawhichdependonarelativelynarrowsetofrelativelyeasily
realizableandreproducibleconditions.[5See,inthisconnection,thegraphicessayofM.Deutsch,
Daedalus87,86(1958).A.ShimonyhascalledmyattentiontoasimilarpassageinC.S.Peirce's
EssaysinthePhilosophyofScience(NewYork:TheLiberalArtsPress,1957),p.237.]Inthepresent

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

3/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

case,Galileo'srestrictionofhisobservationstorelativelyheavybodieswasthemost
importantstepinthisregard.Again,itistruethatiftherewerenophenomenawhichare
independentofallbutamanageablysmallsetofconditions,physicswouldbeimpossible.
Theprecedingtwopoints,thoughhighlysignificantfromthepointofviewofthephilosopher,
arenottheoneswhichsurprisedGalileomost,nordotheycontainaspecificlawofnature.
Thelawofnatureiscontainedinthestatementthatthelengthoftimewhichittakesfora
heavyobjecttofallfromagivenheightisindependentofthesize,material,andshapeofthe
bodywhichdrops.IntheframeworkofNewton'ssecond"law,"thisamountstothestatement
thatthegravitationalforcewhichactsonthefallingbodyisproportionaltoitsmassbut
independentofthesize,material,andshapeofthebodywhichfalls.
Theprecedingdiscussionisintendedtoremindus,first,thatitisnotatallnaturalthat"laws
ofnature"exist,muchlessthatmanisabletodiscoverthem.[6E.Schrodinger,inhisWhatIs
Life?(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1945),p.31,saysthatthissecondmiraclemaywellbe
beyondhumanunderstanding.]Thepresentwriterhadoccasion,sometimeago,tocallattention
tothesuccessionoflayersof"lawsofnature,"eachlayercontainingmoregeneralandmore
encompassinglawsthanthepreviousoneanditsdiscoveryconstitutingadeeperpenetration
intothestructureoftheuniversethanthelayersrecognizedbefore.However,thepointwhich
ismostsignificantinthepresentcontextisthatalltheselawsofnaturecontain,ineventheir
remotestconsequences,onlyasmallpartofourknowledgeoftheinanimateworld.Allthe
lawsofnatureareconditionalstatementswhichpermitapredictionofsomefutureeventson
thebasisoftheknowledgeofthepresent,exceptthatsomeaspectsofthepresentstateofthe
world,inpracticetheoverwhelmingmajorityofthedeterminantsofthepresentstateofthe
world,areirrelevantfromthepointofviewoftheprediction.Theirrelevancyismeantinthe
senseofthesecondpointinthediscussionofGalileo'stheorem.[7Thewriterfeelssurethatitis
unnecessarytomentionthatGalileo'stheorem,asgiveninthetext,doesnotexhaustthecontentof
Galileo'sobservationsinconnectionwiththelawsoffreelyfallingbodies.]
Asregardsthepresentstateoftheworld,suchastheexistenceoftheearthonwhichwelive
andonwhichGalileo'sexperimentswereperformed,theexistenceofthesunandofallour
surroundings,thelawsofnatureareentirelysilent.Itisinconsonancewiththis,first,thatthe
lawsofnaturecanbeusedtopredictfutureeventsonlyunderexceptional
circumstanceswhenalltherelevantdeterminantsofthepresentstateoftheworldare
known.Itisalsoinconsonancewiththisthattheconstructionofmachines,thefunctioningof
whichhecanforesee,constitutesthemostspectacularaccomplishmentofthephysicist.In
thesemachines,thephysicistcreatesasituationinwhichalltherelevantcoordinatesare
knownsothatthebehaviorofthemachinecanbepredicted.Radarsandnuclearreactorsare
examplesofsuchmachines.
Theprincipalpurposeoftheprecedingdiscussionistopointoutthatthelawsofnatureare
allconditionalstatementsandtheyrelateonlytoaverysmallpartofourknowledgeofthe
world.Thus,classicalmechanics,whichisthebestknownprototypeofaphysicaltheory,
givesthesecondderivativesofthepositionalcoordinatesofallbodies,onthebasisofthe
knowledgeofthepositions,etc.,ofthesebodies.Itgivesnoinformationontheexistence,the
presentpositions,orvelocitiesofthesebodies.Itshouldbementioned,forthesakeof
accuracy,thatwediscoveredaboutthirtyyearsagothateventheconditionalstatements
cannotbeentirelyprecise:thattheconditionalstatementsareprobabilitylawswhichenable
usonlytoplaceintelligentbetsonfuturepropertiesoftheinanimateworld,basedonthe
knowledgeofthepresentstate.Theydonotallowustomakecategoricalstatements,not

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

4/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

evencategoricalstatementsconditionalonthepresentstateoftheworld.Theprobabilistic
natureofthe"lawsofnature"manifestsitselfinthecaseofmachinesalso,andcanbe
verified,atleastinthecaseofnuclearreactors,ifonerunsthematverylowpower.However,
theadditionallimitationofthescopeofthelawsofnaturewhichfollowsfromtheir
probabilisticnaturewillplaynoroleintherestofthediscussion.
THEROLEOFMATHEMATICSINPHYSICALTHEORIES
Havingrefreshedourmindsastotheessenceofmathematicsandphysics,weshouldbeina
betterpositiontoreviewtheroleofmathematicsinphysicaltheories.
Naturally,wedousemathematicsineverydayphysicstoevaluatetheresultsofthelawsof
nature,toapplytheconditionalstatementstotheparticularconditionswhichhappento
prevailorhappentointerestus.Inorderthatthisbepossible,thelawsofnaturemustalready
beformulatedinmathematicallanguage.However,theroleofevaluatingtheconsequences
ofalreadyestablishedtheoriesisnotthemostimportantroleofmathematicsinphysics.
Mathematics,or,rather,appliedmathematics,isnotsomuchthemasterofthesituationinthis
function:itismerelyservingasatool.
Mathematicsdoesplay,however,alsoamoresovereignroleinphysics.Thiswasalready
impliedinthestatement,madewhendiscussingtheroleofappliedmathematics,thatthe
lawsofnaturemusthavebeenformulatedinthelanguageofmathematicstobeanobjectfor
theuseofappliedmathematics.Thestatementthatthelawsofnaturearewritteninthe
languageofmathematicswasproperlymadethreehundredyearsago[8Itisattributedto
Galileo]itisnowmoretruethaneverbefore.Inordertoshowtheimportancewhich
mathematicalconceptspossessintheformulationofthelawsofphysics,letusrecall,asan
example,theaxiomsofquantummechanicsasformulated,explicitly,bythegreatphysicist,
Dirac.Therearetwobasicconceptsinquantummechanics:statesandobservables.The
statesarevectorsinHilbertspace,theobservablesselfadjointoperatorsonthesevectors.
Thepossiblevaluesoftheobservationsarethecharacteristicvaluesoftheoperatorsbutwe
hadbetterstopherelestweengageinalistingofthemathematicalconceptsdevelopedin
thetheoryoflinearoperators.
Itistrue,ofcourse,thatphysicschoosescertainmathematicalconceptsfortheformulationof
thelawsofnature,andsurelyonlyafractionofallmathematicalconceptsisusedinphysics.
Itistruealsothattheconceptswhichwerechosenwerenotselectedarbitrarilyfromalisting
ofmathematicaltermsbutweredeveloped,inmanyifnotmostcases,independentlybythe
physicistandrecognizedthenashavingbeenconceivedbeforebythemathematician.Itis
nottrue,however,asissooftenstated,thatthishadtohappenbecausemathematicsuses
thesimplestpossibleconceptsandthesewereboundtooccurinanyformalism.Aswesaw
before,theconceptsofmathematicsarenotchosenfortheirconceptualsimplicityeven
sequencesofpairsofnumbersarefarfrombeingthesimplestconceptsbutfortheir
amenabilitytoclevermanipulationsandtostriking,brilliantarguments.Letusnotforgetthat
theHilbertspaceofquantummechanicsisthecomplexHilbertspace,withaHermitean
scalarproduct.Surelytotheunpreoccupiedmind,complexnumbersarefarfromnaturalor
simpleandtheycannotbesuggestedbyphysicalobservations.Furthermore,theuseof
complexnumbersisinthiscasenotacalculationaltrickofappliedmathematicsbutcomes
closetobeinganecessityintheformulationofthelawsofquantummechanics.Finally,it
nowbeginstoappearthatnotonlycomplexnumbersbutsocalledanalyticfunctionsare
destinedtoplayadecisiveroleintheformulationofquantumtheory.Iamreferringtothe

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

5/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

rapidlydevelopingtheoryofdispersionrelations.
Itisdifficulttoavoidtheimpressionthatamiracleconfrontsushere,quitecomparableinits
strikingnaturetothemiraclethatthehumanmindcanstringathousandargumentstogether
withoutgettingitselfintocontradictions,ortothetwomiraclesoftheexistenceoflawsof
natureandofthehumanmind'scapacitytodivinethem.Theobservationwhichcomes
closesttoanexplanationforthemathematicalconcepts'croppingupinphysicswhichIknow
isEinstein'sstatementthattheonlyphysicaltheorieswhichwearewillingtoacceptarethe
beautifulones.Itstandstoarguethattheconceptsofmathematics,whichinvitetheexercise
ofsomuchwit,havethequalityofbeauty.However,Einstein'sobservationcanatbest
explainpropertiesoftheorieswhichwearewillingtobelieveandhasnoreferencetothe
intrinsicaccuracyofthetheory.Weshall,therefore,turntothislatterquestion.
ISTHESUCCESSOFPHYSICALTHEORIESTRULYSURPRISING?
Apossibleexplanationofthephysicist'suseofmathematicstoformulatehislawsofnatureis
thatheisasomewhatirresponsibleperson.Asaresult,whenhefindsaconnectionbetween
twoquantitieswhichresemblesaconnectionwellknownfrommathematics,hewilljumpat
theconclusionthattheconnectionisthatdiscussedinmathematicssimplybecausehedoes
notknowofanyothersimilarconnection.Itisnottheintentionofthepresentdiscussionto
refutethechargethatthephysicistisasomewhatirresponsibleperson.Perhapsheis.
However,itisimportanttopointoutthatthemathematicalformulationofthephysicist'soften
crudeexperienceleadsinanuncannynumberofcasestoanamazinglyaccuratedescription
ofalargeclassofphenomena.Thisshowsthatthemathematicallanguagehasmoreto
commenditthanbeingtheonlylanguagewhichwecanspeakitshowsthatitis,inavery
realsense,thecorrectlanguage.Letusconsiderafewexamples.
Thefirstexampleistheoftquotedoneofplanetarymotion.Thelawsoffallingbodies
becameratherwellestablishedasaresultofexperimentscarriedoutprincipallyinItaly.
Theseexperimentscouldnotbeveryaccurateinthesenseinwhichweunderstandaccuracy
todaypartlybecauseoftheeffectofairresistanceandpartlybecauseoftheimpossibility,at
thattime,tomeasureshorttimeintervals.Nevertheless,itisnotsurprisingthat,asaresultof
theirstudies,theItaliannaturalscientistsacquiredafamiliaritywiththewaysinwhichobjects
travelthroughtheatmosphere.ItwasNewtonwhothenbroughtthelawoffreelyfalling
objectsintorelationwiththemotionofthemoon,notedthattheparabolaofthethrownrock's
pathontheearthandthecircleofthemoon'spathintheskyareparticularcasesofthesame
mathematicalobjectofanellipse,andpostulatedtheuniversallawofgravitationonthebasis
ofasingle,andatthattimeveryapproximate,numericalcoincidence.Philosophically,the
lawofgravitationasformulatedbyNewtonwasrepugnanttohistimeandtohimself.
Empirically,itwasbasedonveryscantyobservations.Themathematicallanguageinwhich
itwasformulatedcontainedtheconceptofasecondderivativeandthoseofuswhohave
triedtodrawanosculatingcircletoacurveknowthatthesecondderivativeisnotavery
immediateconcept.ThelawofgravitywhichNewtonreluctantlyestablishedandwhichhe
couldverifywithanaccuracyofabout4%hasprovedtobeaccuratetolessthanaten
thousandthofapercentandbecamesocloselyassociatedwiththeideaofabsolute
accuracythatonlyrecentlydidphysicistsbecomeagainboldenoughtoinquireintothe
limitationsofitsaccuracy.[9See,forinstance,R.H.Dicke,Am.Sci.,25(1959).]Certainly,the
exampleofNewton'slaw,quotedoverandoveragain,mustbementionedfirstasa
monumentalexampleofalaw,formulatedintermswhichappearsimpletothe
mathematician,whichhasprovedaccuratebeyondallreasonableexpectations.Letusjust

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

6/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

recapitulateourthesisonthisexample:first,thelaw,particularlysinceasecondderivative
appearsinit,issimpleonlytothemathematician,nottocommonsenseortonon
mathematicallymindedfreshmensecond,itisaconditionallawofverylimitedscope.It
explainsnothingabouttheearthwhichattractsGalileo'srocks,oraboutthecircularformof
themoon'sorbit,orabouttheplanetsofthesun.Theexplanationoftheseinitialconditionsis
lefttothegeologistandtheastronomer,andtheyhaveahardtimewiththem.
Thesecondexampleisthatofordinary,elementaryquantummechanics.Thisoriginated
whenMaxBornnoticedthatsomerulesofcomputation,givenbyHeisenberg,wereformally
identicalwiththerulesofcomputationwithmatrices,establishedalongtimebeforeby
mathematicians.Born,Jordan,andHeisenbergthenproposedtoreplacebymatricesthe
positionandmomentumvariablesoftheequationsofclassicalmechanics.Theyappliedthe
rulesofmatrixmechanicstoafewhighlyidealizedproblemsandtheresultswerequite
satisfactory.However,therewas,atthattime,norationalevidencethattheirmatrix
mechanicswouldprovecorrectundermorerealisticconditions.Indeed,theysay"ifthe
mechanicsashereproposedshouldalreadybecorrectinitsessentialtraits."Asamatterof
fact,thefirstapplicationoftheirmechanicstoarealisticproblem,thatofthehydrogenatom,
wasgivenseveralmonthslater,byPauli.Thisapplicationgaveresultsinagreementwith
experience.ThiswassatisfactorybutstillunderstandablebecauseHeisenberg'srulesof
calculationwereabstractedfromproblemswhichincludedtheoldtheoryofthehydrogen
atom.Themiracleoccurredonlywhenmatrixmechanics,oramathematicallyequivalent
theory,wasappliedtoproblemsforwhichHeisenberg'scalculatingrulesweremeaningless.
Heisenberg'srulespresupposedthattheclassicalequationsofmotionhadsolutionswith
certainperiodicitypropertiesandtheequationsofmotionofthetwoelectronsofthehelium
atom,oroftheevengreaternumberofelectronsofheavieratoms,simplydonothavethese
properties,sothatHeisenberg'srulescannotbeappliedtothesecases.Nevertheless,the
calculationofthelowestenergylevelofhelium,ascarriedoutafewmonthsagobyKinoshita
atCornellandbyBazleyattheBureauofStandards,agreeswiththeexperimentaldata
withintheaccuracyoftheobservations,whichisonepartintenmillion.Surelyinthiscase
we"gotsomethingout"oftheequationsthatwedidnotputin.
Thesameistrueofthequalitativecharacteristicsofthe"complexspectra,"thatis,thespectra
ofheavieratoms.IwishtorecallaconversationwithJordan,whotoldme,whenthe
qualitativefeaturesofthespectrawerederived,thatadisagreementoftherulesderivedfrom
quantummechanicaltheoryandtherulesestablishedbyempiricalresearchwouldhave
providedthelastopportunitytomakeachangeintheframeworkofmatrixmechanics.Inother
words,Jordanfeltthatwewouldhavebeen,atleasttemporarily,helplesshadanunexpected
disagreementoccurredinthetheoryoftheheliumatom.Thiswas,atthattime,developedby
KellnerandbyHilleraas.Themathematicalformalismwastoodearandunchangeableso
that,hadthemiracleofheliumwhichwasmentionedbeforenotoccurred,atruecrisiswould
havearisen.Surely,physicswouldhaveovercomethatcrisisinonewayoranother.Itistrue,
ontheotherhand,thatphysicsasweknowittodaywouldnotbepossiblewithoutaconstant
recurrenceofmiraclessimilartotheoneoftheheliumatom,whichisperhapsthemost
strikingmiraclethathasoccurredinthecourseofthedevelopmentofelementaryquantum
mechanics,butbyfarnottheonlyone.Infact,thenumberofanalogousmiraclesislimited,in
ourview,onlybyourwillingnesstogoaftermoresimilarones.Quantummechanicshad,
nevertheless,manyalmostequallystrikingsuccesseswhichgaveusthefirmconvictionthat
itis,whatwecall,correct.
Thelastexampleisthatofquantumelectrodynamics,orthetheoryoftheLambshift.

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

7/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

WhereasNewton'stheoryofgravitationstillhadobviousconnectionswithexperience,
experienceenteredtheformulationofmatrixmechanicsonlyintherefinedorsublimatedform
ofHeisenberg'sprescriptions.ThequantumtheoryoftheLambshift,asconceivedbyBethe
andestablishedbySchwinger,isapurelymathematicaltheoryandtheonlydirect
contributionofexperimentwastoshowtheexistenceofameasurableeffect.Theagreement
withcalculationisbetterthanonepartinathousand.
Theprecedingthreeexamples,whichcouldbemultipliedalmostindefinitely,shouldillustrate
theappropriatenessandaccuracyofthemathematicalformulationofthelawsofnaturein
termsofconceptschosenfortheirmanipulability,the"lawsofnature"beingofalmost
fantasticaccuracybutofstrictlylimitedscope.Iproposetorefertotheobservationwhich
theseexamplesillustrateastheempiricallawofepistemology.Togetherwiththelawsof
invarianceofphysicaltheories,itisanindispensablefoundationofthesetheories.Without
thelawsofinvariancethephysicaltheoriescouldhavebeengivennofoundationoffactif
theempiricallawofepistemologywerenotcorrect,wewouldlacktheencouragementand
reassurancewhichareemotionalnecessities,withoutwhichthe"lawsofnature"couldnot
havebeensuccessfullyexplored.Dr.R.G.Sachs,withwhomIdiscussedtheempiricallaw
ofepistemology,calleditanarticleoffaithofthetheoreticalphysicist,anditissurelythat.
However,whathecalledourarticleoffaithcanbewellsupportedbyactualexamplesmany
examplesinadditiontothethreewhichhavebeenmentioned.
THEUNIQUENESSOFTHETHEORIESOFPHYSICS
Theempiricalnatureoftheprecedingobservationseemstometobeselfevident.Itsurelyis
nota"necessityofthought"anditshouldnotbenecessary,inordertoprovethis,topointto
thefactthatitappliesonlytoaverysmallpartofourknowledgeoftheinanimateworld.Itis
absurdtobelievethattheexistenceofmathematicallysimpleexpressionsforthesecond
derivativeofthepositionisselfevident,whennosimilarexpressionsforthepositionitselfor
forthevelocityexist.Itisthereforesurprisinghowreadilythewonderfulgiftcontainedinthe
empiricallawofepistemologywastakenforgranted.Theabilityofthehumanmindtoforma
stringof1000conclusionsandstillremain"right,"whichwasmentionedbefore,isasimilar
gift.
Everyempiricallawhasthedisquietingqualitythatonedoesnotknowitslimitations.We
haveseenthatthereareregularitiesintheeventsintheworldarounduswhichcanbe
formulatedintermsofmathematicalconceptswithanuncannyaccuracy.Thereare,onthe
otherhand,aspectsoftheworldconcerningwhichwedonotbelieveintheexistenceofany
accurateregularities.Wecalltheseinitialconditions.Thequestionwhichpresentsitselfis
whetherthedifferentregularities,thatis,thevariouslawsofnaturewhichwillbediscovered,
willfuseintoasingleconsistentunit,oratleastasymptoticallyapproachsuchafusion.
Alternatively,itispossiblethattherealwayswillbesomelawsofnaturewhichhavenothing
incommonwitheachother.Atpresent,thisistrue,forinstance,ofthelawsofheredityandof
physics.Itisevenpossiblethatsomeofthelawsofnaturewillbeinconflictwitheachother
intheirimplications,buteachconvincingenoughinitsowndomainsothatwemaynotbe
willingtoabandonanyofthem.Wemayresignourselvestosuchastateofaffairsorour
interestinclearinguptheconflictbetweenthevarioustheoriesmayfadeout.Wemaylose
interestinthe"ultimatetruth,"thatis,inapicturewhichisaconsistentfusionintoasingleunit
ofthelittlepictures,formedonthevariousaspectsofnature.
Itmaybeusefultoillustratethealternativesbyanexample.Wenowhave,inphysics,two

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

8/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

theoriesofgreatpowerandinterest:thetheoryofquantumphenomenaandthetheoryof
relativity.Thesetwotheorieshavetheirrootsinmutuallyexclusivegroupsofphenomena.
Relativitytheoryappliestomacroscopicbodies,suchasstars.Theeventofcoincidence,that
is,inultimateanalysisofcollision,istheprimitiveeventinthetheoryofrelativityanddefines
apointinspacetime,oratleastwoulddefineapointifthecollidingpanicleswereinfinitely
small.Quantumtheoryhasitsrootsinthemicroscopicworldand,fromitspointofview,the
eventofcoincidence,orofcollision,evenifittakesplacebetweenparticlesofnospatial
extent,isnotprimitiveandnotatallsharplyisolatedinspacetime.Thetwotheoriesoperate
withdifferentmathematicalconceptsthefourdimensionalRiemannspaceandtheinfinite
dimensionalHilbertspace,respectively.Sofar,thetwotheoriescouldnotbeunited,thatis,
nomathematicalformulationexiststowhichbothofthesetheoriesareapproximations.All
physicistsbelievethataunionofthetwotheoriesisinherentlypossibleandthatweshallfind
it.Nevertheless,itispossiblealsotoimaginethatnounionofthetwotheoriescanbefound.
Thisexampleillustratesthetwopossibilities,ofunionandofconflict,mentionedbefore,both
ofwhichareconceivable.
Inordertoobtainanindicationastowhichalternativetoexpectultimately,wecanpretendto
bealittlemoreignorantthanweareandplaceourselvesatalowerlevelofknowledgethan
weactuallypossess.Ifwecanfindafusionofourtheoriesonthislowerlevelofintelligence,
wecanconfidentlyexpectthatwewillfindafusionofourtheoriesalsoatourreallevelof
intelligence.Ontheotherhand,ifwewouldarriveatmutuallycontradictorytheoriesata
somewhatlowerlevelofknowledge,thepossibilityofthepermanenceofconflictingtheories
cannotbeexcludedforourselveseither.Thelevelofknowledgeandingenuityisa
continuousvariableanditisunlikelythatarelativelysmallvariationofthiscontinuous
variablechangestheattainablepictureoftheworldfrominconsistenttoconsistent.[10This
passagewaswrittenafteragreatdealofhesitation.Thewriterisconvincedthatitisuseful,in
epistemologicaldiscussions,toabandontheidealizationthatthelevelofhumanintelligencehasa
singularpositiononanabsolutescale.Insomecasesitmayevenbeusefultoconsidertheattainment
whichispossibleattheleveloftheintelligenceofsomeotherspecies.However,thewriteralsorealizes
thathisthinkingalongthelinesindicatedinthetextwastoobriefandnotsubjecttosufficientcritical
appraisaltobereliable.]Consideredfromthispointofview,thefactthatsomeofthetheories
whichweknowtobefalsegivesuchamazinglyaccurateresultsisanadversefactor.Hadwe
somewhatlessknowledge,thegroupofphenomenawhichthese"false"theoriesexplain
wouldappeartoustobelargeenoughto"prove"thesetheories.However,thesetheoriesare
consideredtobe"false"byusjustforthereasonthattheyare,inultimateanalysis,
incompatiblewithmoreencompassingpicturesand,ifsufficientlymanysuchfalsetheories
arediscovered,theyareboundtoprovealsotobeinconflictwitheachother.Similarly,itis
possiblethatthetheories,whichweconsidertobe"proved"byanumberofnumerical
agreementswhichappearstobelargeenoughforus,arefalsebecausetheyareinconflict
withapossiblemoreencompassingtheorywhichisbeyondourmeansofdiscovery.Ifthis
weretrue,wewouldhavetoexpectconflictsbetweenourtheoriesassoonastheirnumber
growsbeyondacertainpointandassoonastheycoverasufficientlylargenumberofgroups
ofphenomena.Incontrasttothearticleoffaithofthetheoreticalphysicistmentionedbefore,
thisisthenightmareofthetheorist.
Letusconsiderafewexamplesof"false"theorieswhichgive,inviewoftheirfalseness,
alarminglyaccuratedescriptionsofgroupsofphenomena.Withsomegoodwill,onecan
dismisssomeoftheevidencewhichtheseexamplesprovide.ThesuccessofBohr'searly
andpioneeringideasontheatomwasalwaysarathernarrowoneandthesameappliesto

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

9/10

8/5/15

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences

Ptolemy'sepicycles.Ourpresentvantagepointgivesanaccuratedescriptionofall
phenomenawhichthesemoreprimitivetheoriescandescribe.Thesameisnottrueany
longerofthesocalledfreeelectrontheory,whichgivesamarvelouslyaccuratepictureof
many,ifnotmost,propertiesofmetals,semiconductors,andinsulators.Inparticular,it
explainsthefact,neverproperlyunderstoodonthebasisofthe"realtheory,"thatinsulators
showaspecificresistancetoelectricitywhichmaybe1026timesgreaterthanthatofmetals.
Infact,thereisnoexperimentalevidencetoshowthattheresistanceisnotinfiniteunderthe
conditionsunderwhichthefreeelectrontheorywouldleadustoexpectaninfiniteresistance.
Nevertheless,weareconvincedthatthefreeelectrontheoryisacrudeapproximationwhich
shouldbereplaced,inthedescriptionofallphenomenaconcerningsolids,byamore
accuratepicture.
Ifviewedfromourrealvantagepoint,thesituationpresentedbythefreeelectrontheoryis
irritatingbutisnotlikelytoforebodeanyinconsistencieswhichareunsurmountableforus.
Thefreeelectrontheoryraisesdoubtsastohowmuchweshouldtrustnumericalagreement
betweentheoryandexperimentasevidenceforthecorrectnessofthetheory.Weareusedto
suchdoubts.
Amuchmoredifficultandconfusingsituationwouldariseifwecould,someday,establisha
theoryofthephenomenaofconsciousness,orofbiology,whichwouldbeascoherentand
convincingasourpresenttheoriesoftheinanimateworld.Mendel'slawsofinheritanceand
thesubsequentworkongenesmaywellformthebeginningofsuchatheoryasfarasbiology
isconcerned.Furthermore,,itisquitepossiblethatanabstractargumentcanbefoundwhich
showsthatthereisaconflictbetweensuchatheoryandtheacceptedprinciplesofphysics.
Theargumentcouldbeofsuchabstractnaturethatitmightnotbepossibletoresolvethe
conflict,infavorofoneoroftheothertheory,byanexperiment.Suchasituationwouldputa
heavystrainonourfaithinourtheoriesandonourbeliefintherealityoftheconceptswhich
weform.ItwouldgiveusadeepsenseoffrustrationinoursearchforwhatIcalled"the
ultimatetruth."Thereasonthatsuchasituationisconceivableisthat,fundamentally,wedo
notknowwhyourtheoriesworksowell.Hence,theiraccuracymaynotprovetheirtruthand
consistency.Indeed,itisthiswriter'sbeliefthatsomethingratherakintothesituationwhich
wasdescribedaboveexistsifthepresentlawsofheredityandofphysicsareconfronted.
Letmeendonamorecheerfulnote.Themiracleoftheappropriatenessofthelanguageof
mathematicsfortheformulationofthelawsofphysicsisawonderfulgiftwhichweneither
understandnordeserve.Weshouldbegratefulforitandhopethatitwillremainvalidin
futureresearchandthatitwillextend,forbetterorforworse,toourpleasure,eventhough
perhapsalsotoourbafflement,towidebranchesoflearning.
MerciW.Cooper
HistoireetphilosophiedesmathmatiquesLequasiempirismeenphilosophiedesmathmatiques.Une
presentationLiensmathmatiquesenrelationindirecteaveclequasiempirismeRetourlapaged'accueil

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html

10/10