O#o (c) SIG

## Mattimathics ...

1. Preparations
2. Mathematics & Mathematicians
3. Mathematics & Models in  Science

### 1) Preparations

That is the format of this first exploration of Matti’s work.
What Matti found, if formulated in his own form of mathematics.
But Matti could find this, because he formed his own form of mathematics.

So, mathematics stands central.
It is at the same time the instrument for thinking, and recording.
Does mathematics really bridge the ideas in the mind and words on paper?
Is the mathematics of/for thinking, the same as the mathematics of formulation/formulae?

I started with the following questions to Matti; this was my email:

 O#o van Nieuwenhuijze, MSc, MD kirjoitti 24.05.2012 kello 00:41: Hi Matti,Thx, I think it is great, what is possible in this series of interviews! For tomorrow (in your time zone, today already) it might be nice to talk about mathematics.Yet, rather, in such a way that anybody can sense, feel, grasp what mathematics is about.Few people remember that it is a symbol(ic) language, which WE create.It may be wise to speak about the feeling, “the beauty”..., of mathematics. Later, we will be able to get into logic, formulations and formalisms, and calculation/results. But first.. What is mathematics about, and a language for communication and ... Thinking? Why are there so many different forms of mathematics; what makes them different? You discovered/created/designed/use different models of mathematics; why, how? What are the specific models of mathematics which you now use, and why? This will probably give a good general starting point.As before, it starts with the intuitive/feeling level.It then goes into practical choices and uses.Later we can look, in detail, in the result that offers. You already mentioned “sub-manifolds” (systems), “quantum” (dimensional operations) and “p-adic numbers” (calculus); maybe the most central of these can be of help as example to illustrate how you interprete/use mathematics? Feel well O#o

## Reflection

### Names of mathematicians

One of the difficulties in dealing with mathematics, and mathematicians, is what i call ‘name dropping’. “Descartes”. “Newton”. “Hilbert”. And so on.

These are the name of mathematicians, but in mathematics they do not represent their name. They do not represent them. But they represent their thinking; or rather: their way of thinking. But only in the manner, or in the extent, of the way the mathematician thinks of that, when he refers to that.

### Flavours of thoughts

It is like someone speaking of the memory of the flavour of a cheese that they ate. For them it is fully meaningful.
Yet, that meaning is significant only within their development/experience, and only with respect to what they try to communicate.
It is as if they call up the memory of the flavour of that cheese in making a recipe for a meal that they might like to cook up.

### Dancing idea(l)s

For me (O#o) “Mathematics is the score for a choreography for the dance of ideas in our mind.
Like a musical score, which defines how instruments are played in an orchestra.
Yet, every instrument/player/idea and thus every performance/concert/conclusion will be different and unique; determined by context conditions.
The mathematician is not a pianola; the mathematical formula has different effects in every mathematician.

### Mathematical language

Therein, ‘methinks’, mathematics is no different than language.
A formula is the equivalent of a word.
The meaning of the word/formula depends on how it is spoken.
Yet, the meaning is meaningful only as expression of the underlying ideas.

Physical meaning/interpretation

### 2) Mathematics & Mathematicians

How Matti learned to use mathematics; it worked - no need for understanding.
Then it became clear that those models caused the conflicts in physics (symmetry versus broken symmetry).
By using different mathematical models, the break could be healed.
(In-between reflection: the different forms of science are consequence of different mathematical models)

### 3) Mathematics & Models in  Science

Instead of using four mathematical models for for different forms of science (classical, relativistic, quantum and unified field), Matti uses his same one m model in four different interpretations.