Search the Archive
  Home
  Welcome to
  Station Information
  Mathematical and
  Natural Sciences

  Astronomy
  Biology
  Chemistry
  Computer science
  Earth science
  Ecology
  Health science
  Mathematics
  Physics
  Statistics
  Applied Arts
  and Sciences

  Agriculture
 
Architecture
  Business
  Communication
  Education
  Engineering
  Family and
  consumer science

  Government
  Law
  Library and information
  science

  Medicine
  Politics
  Public affairs
  Software engineering
  Technology
  Transport
  Social Sciences
  and Philosophy

  Archaeology
  Economics
  Geography
  History
  History of science
  and technology

  Language
  Linguistics
  Mythology
  Philosophy
  Political science
  Psychology
  Sociology
  Culture and
  Fine Arts

  Classics
  Cooking
  Dance
  Entertainment
  Film
  Games
  Gardening
  Handicraft
  Hobbies
  Holidays
  Internet
  Literature
  Music
  Opera
  Painting
  Poetry
  Radio
  Recreation
  Religion
  Sculpture
  Sports
  Television
  Theater
  Tourism
  Visual arts and design

Foundations of mathematics


 
The term "foundations of mathematics" is sometimes used for certain fields of mathematics itself, namely for mathematical logic, axiomatic set theory, proof theory and model theory. The search for foundations of mathematics is however also the central question of the philosophy of mathematics: on what ultimate basis can mathematical statements be called "true"?

The current dominant mathematical paradigm is based on axiomatic set theory and formal logic. Virtually all mathematical theorems today can be formulated as theorems of set theory. The truth of a mathematical statement, in this view, is then nothing but the claim that the statement can be derived from the axioms of set theory using the rules of formal logic.

This formalistic approach does not explain several issues: why we should use the axioms we do and not some others, why we should employ the logical rules we do and not some other, why "true" mathematical statements (e.g., the laws of arithmetic) appear to be true in the physical world. This was called "The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the physical sciences" by Eugene Wigner in 1960.

The above mentioned notion of formalistic truth could also turn out to be rather pointless: it is perfectly possible that all statements, even contradictions, can be derived from the axioms of set theory. Moreover, as a consequence of Gödel's second incompleteness theorem, we can never be sure that this is not the case.

In mathematical realism, sometimes called Platonism, the existence of a world of mathematical objects independent of humans is postulated; the truths about these objects are discovered by humans. In this view, the laws of nature and the laws of mathematics have a similar status, and the "effectiveness" ceases to be "unreasonable". Not our axioms, but the very real world of mathematical objects forms the foundation. The obvious question, then, is: how do we access this world?

Some modern theories in the philosophy of mathematics deny the existence of foundations in the original sense. Some theories tend to focus on mathematical practice, and aim to describe and analyze the actual working of mathematicians as a social group. Others try to create a cognitive science of mathematics, focusing on human cognition as the origin of the reliability of mathematics when applied to the 'real world'. These theories would propose to find foundations only in human thought, not in any 'objective' outside construct. The matter remains controversial.

Table of contents
1 See also:
2 Sources
3 External links

See also:

Sources

External links








Site Partners

Easy Encyclopedia
Small Business Forum
Free Web Templates
Free Mortgage Quote

  This content from wikipedia is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License