今天我

Friday, 13 November 2009

  • Some reflections on modern mathematics

    Introduction
    At its present state, mathematics has advanced to a point where two randomly chosen mathematicians, or graduate students, may have never heard of what each other is doing. The reason is not that mathematics is hard (it is hard as always!); given enough time and devotion, a competent student can understand something about "almost anything". The main reason is that there is too much mathematics to learn in a lifetime. Just to get a feeling, you may click this link to see the current classification of mathematical fields (and sub-fields, sub-sub-fields, etc). Of course, we must not miss the forest for the trees, but the popular criticism about "knowing more and more about less and less" is not unjustifiable.

    Another problem is the highly inefficient way of storing mathematical results. Theorems are scattered in textbooks, monographs and journal articles, and it is often difficult to find them. To make the matter worse, different notations and conventions are adopted by different authors. In more advanced work, authors tend to skip steps in order to leave space (it is easy to see that...), and even experts (not to mention the average author) make occasional errors. All these make the life of beginners quite difficult. An example is the delicate measurability problem of stochastic processes from which I am now suffering. Sometimes I wonder whether this can be avoided.

    The information age
    The rise of computer and internet has revolutionized our lifestyles. To give a simple example, international business is not possible without a highly sophisticated computerized system. (Think about the stock market, foreign exchanges, and Bloomberg!) As a matter of fact, computer has inspired mathematical theories such as optimization, statistics and numerical analysis. I believe that there will be another revolution that change our way of doing mathematics.

    Mathematical logic
    The basis of this potential revolution is mathematical logic, which, since the time of Boole, Russel, and Godel, has developed greatly and is now widely regarded as the foundation of all mathematics. The basic idea is that every mathematical theory can be expressed as (1) a collection of axioms about some primitive, undefined objects, and (2) theorems which are derived from these axioms by logical deduction.

    For example, in probability theory, the basic object is that of a "probability space". A probability space is a triple (S, F, P), where S is a set, F is a Borel field of subsets of S, and P is a measure on F with total mass 1. The actual names of these objects (sample space, event space, probability) are not important. What matters is the properties being assumed. From these axioms (with further definitions and appropriate hypotheses) we can derive properties of probability models.

    The main achievement of mathematical logic is that the "axiomatic method" described above can be expressed in terms of a formal language, and that virtually all mathematics can be reduced to statements of set theory. This makes the computerized storage and management of mathematical results possible.

    A database of theorems
    The title of this subsection may remind you of Wikipedia. It is indeed a very comprehensive database, but it is nothing more than a very huge digital book.

    Imagine that a database of theorems is built. From the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms of set theory to the classification of finite groups, all mathematical propositions are stored in the system. In the system, the statement and proof of each proposition are translated into the formal language of logic, and the validity of each step is verifed by a sophisticated system so that no mistakes are then possible. We can also imagine that the system has reasonable translation ability. For example, if we enter "A is a set with two points", the computer will know that we mean

    (there exists x)(there exists y)((x != y) and ((for all z)( z in A => ((z = x) or (z = y)))).

    Hence, when a mathematician writes a new paper, he can verify that his results are correct by entering them into the database.

    Of course, it is impossible to prove every single theorem from the axioms of set theory. So there must be a well established part of mathematics which is regarded as standard. For example, when we enter a proof, we may write something like

    \include{basic real analysis, basic abstract algebra, ...}
    \include{ABC's 1950 paper, XYZ's 2009 paper, ...}

    so that preliminary results can be used freely without having to prove them again. This also makes possible the grouping of mathematical results "which are highly related". It is not difficult to imagine a good interface to do this. The advantage of such as system in education is clearly seen (see the remark).

    Some delicate problems. Conclusion
    What I have described is only a way to store and manage mathematical propositions. It may take years or even decades to formalize and implement this idea to the point that we can all use the system freely. (Or, at the other extreme, it is already working but I do not know.) Even if it is working, it needs a great number of scientists to maintain and improve.

    Of course, the real power of a mathematician is the ability to "see through the surface" and spot hidden linkage among seemingly unrelated theories. (Good mathematicians see analogies between theorems; great mathematicians see analogies between analogies.) Whether this is possible to be computerized to a certain extent is a problem beyond my capbability.

    Remark:
    Such things are being done (of course). See http://epgy.stanford.edu/TPE/index.html and the references therein. But it is still in a very local scale.

Friday, 25 September 2009

Thursday, 24 September 2009

  • 創作

    我之前沒有看 youtube 的習慣。但因為宿舍的電腦什麼都沒有,想聽歌的時候,便會去 youtube 找來聽。無意間找到一套電影的原聲碟,一邊聽,一邊回想電影的情節。我不懂音樂,可是能泛起心中漣漪的,應該是好音樂吧。

    G. H. Hardy 說過:

    Exposition, criticism, appreciation, is work for second-rate minds.

    換言之,創作是第一流的人做的。(這裡,我想不到怎樣翻譯 mind 這個字。例如 "He has a great mind" 譯作 "他有好的思想" 並不恰當。mind 是活的,不斷思考的,但 "思想" 卻好像是靜止的東西。) 創作不為什麼,只為留下一些痕跡:

    Here, on the level sand,
    Between the sea and land,
    What shall I build or write
    Against the fall of night?

    Tell me of runes to grave
    That holds the bursting wave,
    Or bastions to design
    For longer date than mine.

    雖然 Hardy 的話很刻薄,但我很認同。我就不能創作這些能感染人的音樂,所以我很羨慕音樂家。我知道很多很漂亮的數學,它們都令人廢寢忘餐。將來我也想創造新的東西,但這些和音樂畢竟不同。尤其是漏斷人靜的夜晚,一段琴音,不用語言,便使人神往。

Sunday, 06 September 2009

  • 暑假

    暑假的最後一天,在足球場上渡過。

    前陣子還在埋怨天氣熱,黃昏時的一陣涼風,卻令人想到秋天快來了。之後,不時也會懷念夏日的暑氣吧。

    明月夜。這涼風,總令人想起往事。

Monday, 24 August 2009

  • 開集與閉集

    拓樸學最基本的概念是開集 (open set) 與閉集 (closed set)。在尺度空間 (metric space) (X, d) 中,子集 A 是開當且僅當對 A 的每一點 x,都有 r > 0 使得 B(x, r) = {y: d(x, y) < r} 是 A 的子集。而子集 A 是閉當且僅當 A (相對於 X) 的餘集 (complement) 是開的。問題是,為什麼開集叫開集?為什麼閉集叫閉集?

    不久之前和 QFN 同學吃晚飯時,黃寶誠教授講解過一次,雖然簡單,但也有趣。現作解釋如下:考慮 A 中的一個序列 {xn}。如果 A 是開的,那麼 xn 就有可能收斂至 A 外面的點。如果 A 是閉的,則無論 xn 收斂到那,都只能在 A 裡面。這就好像說一道門是開是閉一樣。下面我們證明一個準確的定理。為方便起見,我們只考慮尺度空間。

    引理:A 是尺度空間 (X, d) 的子集,{xn} 是 A 中的一個收斂序列。那麼 {xn} 的極限 x 必定在 cl A 裡。
    證明:可參考任何課本。

    因為我們關心的是 {xn} 的極限能不能跳出 A,我們只需要考慮 x 在 A 的邊界 (boundary) 上的情況。(A 的邊界是 bdy A = cl A \ int A。)

    定理 1:設 A 是尺度空間 (X, d) 的子集。以下命題是等價的:
    (i) A 是開的。
    (ii) 如果 {xn} 是 A 中的一個序列,而且收斂至 A 邊界上的點 x,那麼 x 並不在 A 裡面。
    證明:先假設 (i) 成立,那麼 A = int A。如果 xn 收斂至 bdy A 上的點 x, 根據 bdy A 定義 x 並不在 int A = A。
    現假設 (i) 不成立,那麼在 A 中必然存在 x 使得對所有 r > 0,B(xr) 都並不完全在 A 裡面。不難看出 x 在 bdy A 裡。設 xn = xn = 1, 2, ...,那麼 {xn} 收斂至 bdy 上的點 x,所以 (ii) 不成立。定理證畢。

    用類似的方法,可以證明

    定理 2:設 A 是尺度空間 (Xd) 的子集。以下命題是等價的:
    (i) A 是閉的。
    (ii) 如果 {xn} 是 A 中的一個序列,而且收斂至 A 邊界上的點 x,那麼 x 在 A 裡面。

wtkleonard

  • Visit wtkleonard's Xanga Site
    • Name: WTK
    • Gender: Male
    • Member Since: 4/2/2004
Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.