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.
To understand a science it is necessary to know its history.
... that, in a few years, all great physical constants will have been approximately estimated, and that the only occupation which will be left to men of science will be to carry these measurements to another place of decimals.
Most institutions demand unqualified faith; but the institution of science makes skepticism a virtue.
It takes so long to train a physicist to the place where he understands the nature of physical problems that he is already too old to solve them.
It's the poorer people in tropical zones who will get really hit by climate change - as well as some ecosystems, which nobody wants to see disappear.
There's a small worm called Loa Loa Filariasis. This parasite can survive in one environment exclusively- namely, underneath the skin and inside the eyes of human beings. Children and the elderly in tropical regions (usually the poorest) are the most widely affected. A painful, slow death is virtually certain. The worm can actually live in the host for 17 years before the host finally dies.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.