Doğadaki Matemaiksel Düzen

İt İs Wrong To Compare The Mathematical Order İn Nature To Language

Mustafa Günen (English)

In the previous section, I mentioned that the definition of mathematics as a language is used very easily by scientists. However, I emphasized that when you reason after scrutinizing a bit, the reality reveals very different results beyond the analogy of language. Let me explain it in more detail now.

Firstly, a language analogy can be made for ‘man-invented’ mathematics because mathematics, just like the spoken language, is the product of the human mind. However, it is wrong to make a language analogy for the mathematical order in nature because elements based on an order like language have to be created or structured in line with its purpose or what it requires. Therefore, such structural mechanisms cannot form on their own. Besides, building a structural element such as language depends on time; it can take a long time. However, mathematics, which we call the language of nature, came onto stage at the very beginning of Planck’s time. Indeed, the Big Bang began entirely in mathematical order.

We said that language takes time to form, but the problem is, time does not exist before energy becomes active. In other words, energy needs to become active in order to speak the language of mathematics. However, it can only become active with mathematics. Therefore, in the beginning there is no time for the mathematics language to form. In other words, energy could not have created and applied a language while forming the universe at the same time. As I said, energy starts by speaking this language. This means that energy has created the universe by speaking and using the language that we call mathematics, as an inborn feature, that is, not acquired through learning. Therefore, mathematics cannot be a language created by the universe because even if this language had existed one second before the universe came into existence, this means it is a system that created the universe by directing its development.

There is another handicap in this regard. Mathematics does not matter for energy, whether it is a language or any other element because energy does not speak any language unless it is activated. If there is no movement, there is no need for speech, then no language is needed. In other words, energy which does not change its current state does not need an order or mathematics. We also know that we have nothing but energy. This means that if the mathematical order is not in the content of energy, such an order cannot form, but somehow the energy became active in a magnificent order and the universe came into existence.

In this case, even if mathematics is a somehow constructed language, it has to be injected to or interacted with energy because it started the movement. Otherwise, apparently it is unlikely that energy created or learned the language. According to this result, if the only element that composes the nature is energy and mathematics is a language, it is not energy or nature that speaks this language, but mathematics itself. Mathematics talks by means of energy. To make an artistic analogy to this, mathematics puts nature on stage together with energy by speaking and vocalizing energy. As a result, nature cannot be staged without both.

There is another important situation. Any language, if it is spoken by a person who knows it, becomes active and is noticed, and if it is not spoken, it is passive. However, the mathematical order in nature is completely active and uninterrupted. That’s why I stated that the analogy of language for the order of nature does not cover much, it does not make much sense.

In the previous section, I asked “Does mathematics change or develop?”, and briefly replied, “Mathematics neither develops, nor changes.” Let me go into details about this.

First of all, for the development of mathematics, it must have a detectable content. Let me explain it in a broader sense. For a development to occur in something, first of all, it must have a clear core structure, content or a defined given value, so that the difference can be detected and the development of that thing determined. This is not enough, the state of its own structure should also have the features enabling the realization of development. However, as is known, in the beginning, the only element in the universe having such a content and feature is energy.

So, does mathematics have these features to develop? No it is not because the order we call mathematics is abstract. It is not possible to talk about development for something abstract. According to the standard model (Big Bang), energy started in so small atomic scales and then formed the gigantic universe. So the progress is tremendous. However, it cannot be said that mathematics has gone through a similar process and that it also develops alongside energy because the mathematical order cannot go from state to state like energy, so it does not develop! It is what it was in the beginning. All its abilities were formed in the beginning.

Actually, the thing is, there is no development in mathematics. It is energy that develops; energy transforms from state to state, and all these transformations take place in line with the laws of mathematics.

Let me tell you about an important situation in this regard. In order to be able to talk about development in the mathematics of nature, mathematics must be taking position in line with the state of energy. In other words, energy must be constantly developing, and mathematics should be directing it in line with this development. However, that is not the case. In common parlance, mathematical order does not follow energy. Energy follows mathematics, acting in accordance with the order of mathematics since the very beginning.

To put it more clearly, our mathematics calculates the possibilities and draws conclusions based on the results of developments. However, the order in nature does not start from results, it creates the results itself. This is why the order in nature and the mathematics that we invented are so different.

As I mentioned before, nature does not indeed use the mathematics we know because the mathematics we invented is the methods, etc. that we created ourselves, which enables us to understand the relationships of formations, patterns, forms, numbers and quantities in nature by counting, proportioning and measuring. But nature does not use any of these methods: neither addition and subtraction, nor multiplication and division. It does not set up any equations; it does not do calculations. It doesn’t count anything, it doesn’t know about any quantity! It doesn’t even know that two by two makes four!

Now, what I am saying may sound exaggerated, strange or even absurd, but it is not. If you have noticed, these are numerical operations that we call mathematics. In other words, they are elements that require calculation. We are able to do these operations thanks to our perfect brain and mind, which nature has provided us with. In short, we have the ability to evaluate data, calculate and draw conclusions. Well, in the beginning, was there an element, a subject, with the ability to process data, which provided order in (immanent) or outside the energy? We cannot say there was because there is no such information in any ways! The universe was in its initial phase then. So, for a long time, there had existed nothing but a few kinds of particles, let alone something that was intelligent, and able to operate.

Anyway, one thing is for sure; no matter how you define it, since the beginning there has been an element called the order of nature. Whatever this element is, it has the ability to somehow evaluate the current situation it is in and interact accordingly. It also has a feature, a skill that can perform applications in a fraction one over trillions of a second, and that can somehow control and direct the proportions of particles at similar small scales.

As a result, no matter how it is explained, there is a magnificent order and this is very important. I will continue with the topic of order in the next section.

(Translated from Turkish by Semih AYDIN)


Yorum Yapın