THERE IS A story about two friends, who were classmates in high school, talking about their jobs. One of them became a statistician and was working on population trends. He showed a reprint to his former classmate. The reprint started, as usual, with the Gaussian distribution and the statistician explained to his former classmate the meaning of the symbols for the actual population, for the average population, and so on. His classmate was a bit incredulous and was not quite sure whether the statistician was pulling his leg. "How can you know that?" was his query. "And what is this symbol here?" "Oh," said the statistician, "this is pi." "What is that?" "The ratio of the circumference of the circle to its diameter." "Well, now you are pushing your joke too far," said the classmate, "surely the population has nothing to do with the circumference of the circle."

Naturally, we are inclined to smile about the simplicity of the classmate's approach. Nevertheless, when I heard this story, I had to admit to an eerie feeling because, surely, the reaction of the classmate betrayed only plain common sense. I was even more confused when, not many days later, someone came to me and expressed his bewilderment [1 The remark to be quoted was made by F. Werner when he was a student in Princeton.] with the fact that we make a rather narrow selection when choosing the data on which we test our theories. "How do we know that, if we made a theory which focuses its attention on phenomena we disregard and disregards some of the phenomena now commanding our attention, that we could not build another theory which has little in common with the present one but which, nevertheless, explains just as many phenomena as the present theory?" It has to be admitted that we have no definite evidence that there is no such theory.

The preceding two stories illustrate the two main points which are the subjects of the present discourse. The first point is that mathematical concepts turn up in... [continues]

### Cite This Essay

APA

(2008, 07). The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 07, 2008, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Unreasonable-Effectiveness-Mathematics-Natural-Sciences-155442.html

MLA

"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" StudyMode.com. 07 2008. 07 2008 <http://www.studymode.com/essays/Unreasonable-Effectiveness-Mathematics-Natural-Sciences-155442.html>.

CHICAGO

"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences." StudyMode.com. 07, 2008. Accessed 07, 2008. http://www.studymode.com/essays/Unreasonable-Effectiveness-Mathematics-Natural-Sciences-155442.html.