You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you tell me precisely what it is a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that.
John Von NeumannRead
The sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly make models. By a model is meant a mathematical construct which, with the addition of certain verbal interpretations, describes observed phenomena. The justification of such a mathematical construct is solely and precisely that it is expected to work-that is, correctly to describe phenomena from a reasonably wide area.
Interpretation
Scientific models aim to describe phenomena rather than explain them in absolute terms.
In this quote, John Von Neumann emphasizes that the primary function of scientific models is not to provide explanations or interpretations of the underlying reality, but to effectively describe and predict observed phenomena. He highlights that the value of a mathematical model is determined by its predictive power and its ability to work across various scenarios, thus illustrating the pragmatic nature of scientific inquiry.
In practice
In a scientific conference discussing the role of mathematics in science.
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you tell me precisely what it is a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that.
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
Any one who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin. For, as has been pointed out several times, there is no such thing as a random number - there are only methods to produce random numbers, and a strict arithmetic procedure of course is not such a method.
It would appear that we have reached the limits of what it is possible to achieve with computer technology, although one should be careful with such statements, as they tend to sound pretty silly in 5 years.
Technological possibilities are irresistible to man. If man can go to the moon, he will. If he can control the climate, he will.
I would like to make a confession which may seem immoral: I do not believe absolutely in Hilbert space any more.
We all know that UFOs are real. All we need to ask is where do they come from, and what do they want?
If you want to find out anything from the theoretical physicists about the methods they use, I advise you to stick closely to one principle: don't listen to their words, fix your attention on their deeds. To him who is a discoverer in this field the products of his imagination appear so necessary and natural that he regards them, and would like to have them regarded by others, not as creations of thought but as given realities.
If the Earth gets hit by an asteroid, it's game over. It's control-alt-delete for civilization.
It surprises me how disinterested we are today about things like physics, space, the universe and philosophy of our existence, our purpose, our final destination. Its a crazy world out there. Be curious.
'It worked.' (said after witnessing the first atomic detonation).
From the rocket we can see the huge sphere of the planet in one or another phase of the Moon. We can see how the sphere rotates, and how within a few hours it shows all its sides successively ... and we shall observe various points on the surface of the Earth for several minutes and from different sides very closely. This picture is so majestic, attractive and infinitely varied that I wish with all my soul that you and I could see it.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.