Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Computers, Paradoxes and The Foundations of Mathematics PDF
Computers, Paradoxes and The Foundations of Mathematics PDF
Foundations of Mathematics
Some great thinkers of the 20th century have shown that even in the austere
world of mathematics, incompleteness and randomness are rife
Gregory J. Chaitin
Figure 1. Drawing Hands, composed by M. C. Escher in 1948, provides a visual analogy for the so-called Russell
paradox, named for the British mathematician Bertrand Russell, who brought this problem in logic to the atten-
tion of his contemporaries in the early years of the 20th century—eventually inspiring the work of Kurt Gödel,
Alan Turing and the author on the limits of mathematics. One form the Russell paradox takes is the pair of state-
ments: “The following sentence is false. The preceding sentence is true.” Either assertion alone seems reasonable
(that is, it may either be true or false), but together the sentences cannot be evaluated for their truth or falsehood.
It is their combination that creates the paradox, just as with the two hands of Escher’s drawing.
that are not members of themselves. Then ask, himself?” He shaves himself if and only if he
“Is this set a member of itself?” If it is a member doesn’t shave himself. Now you may say,
of itself, then it shouldn’t be, and vice versa. “Who cares about this hypothetical barber?
The set of all sets in the Russell paradox is This is just silly word play!” But when you’re
like the barber in a small, remote town who dealing with the mathematical concept of a set,
shaves all the men who don’t shave them- it’s not so easy to dismiss a logical problem.
selves. That description seems pretty reason- The Russell paradox is a set-theoretic echo of
able, until you ask, “Does the barber shave an earlier paradox, one that was known to the
Figure 3. Quantum mechanics reflects the role of randomness in physics. The seemingly smooth, regular decay of a radioactive substance, for
example, is in reality made up of a series of discrete steps, where the exact moment that the next atom decays cannot be predicted (left). The au-
thor’s work highlights a similar randomness in mathematics, which can be seen, for instance, in the distribution of prime numbers. Although
the number of primes less than x follows a well-known trend, the curve is made up of a series of erratic steps, and the exact value of the next
larger prime cannot be predicted precisely from any general theory (right).