You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

sark comments on The Value of Theoretical Research - Less Wrong Discussion

30 Post author: paulfchristiano 25 February 2011 06:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (50)

Comments (50)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: sark 26 February 2011 05:48:06PM 5 points [-]

voted up for this:

although you can do the math and later find an application, you could just as well wait until the application appears and then do the math.

...combined with the fact that a lot of pure math does not (or havent yet anyways) lead to applications. It pays to put effort only into math that is immediately practically useful.

We need proper counterfactuals here, cases where a practical use of math counterfactually would not have been possible without previous development as pure math. And also, what-if the pure mathematicians have been directly working on practical math instead?

Comment author: JoshuaZ 01 March 2011 06:49:41PM 5 points [-]

We need proper counterfactuals here, cases where a practical use of math counterfactually would not have been possible without previous development as pure math.

I think a decent argument could be made that Einstein would have been unlikely to have been able on his own to work out the necessary math he used in special and general relativity. On the other hand, this is much more of a severe issue for gen relativity, and it isn't implausible that once he had constructed the basic theory others would have listened to him enough to work out the underlying math.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit