<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Beauty Equal Truth in Physics and Math?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/</link>
	<description>A Mathematician Writes About Philosophy, Science, Ethics, Religion, Skepticism and the Search for Truth</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:45:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: clockbackward</title>
		<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/comment-page-1/#comment-1712</link>
		<dc:creator>clockbackward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 04:09:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clockbackward.wordpress.com/?p=242#comment-1712</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t forget this (quite important) reason as well:

When what we originally see as multiple phenomena are discovered to be emanations of the same thing, the resulting equations tend to become more aesthetically pleasing.

I would also add that psychologically, it may be easier for us to discover &quot;simple&quot; , &quot;pleasing&quot; explanations because our minds are more suited for searching for those solutions.

I wish that I could comment about why the universe has symmetries. They do seem fundamental to its nature, but without knowing more about the formation of the universe and the reason for its laws and constants being what they are, that question may remain inaccessible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t forget this (quite important) reason as well:</p>
<p>When what we originally see as multiple phenomena are discovered to be emanations of the same thing, the resulting equations tend to become more aesthetically pleasing.</p>
<p>I would also add that psychologically, it may be easier for us to discover &#8220;simple&#8221; , &#8220;pleasing&#8221; explanations because our minds are more suited for searching for those solutions.</p>
<p>I wish that I could comment about why the universe has symmetries. They do seem fundamental to its nature, but without knowing more about the formation of the universe and the reason for its laws and constants being what they are, that question may remain inaccessible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julia</title>
		<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/comment-page-1/#comment-1710</link>
		<dc:creator>Julia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 03:28:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clockbackward.wordpress.com/?p=242#comment-1710</guid>
		<description>Hmm -- ok, so it seems like all of the reasons why beauty=truth are either mundane (e.g., the equations only look beautiful because we write them that way) or they&#039;re a consequence of statistical laws.

The one exception is your description of how symmetry in the universe leads to simple and symmetrical (hence beautiful) equations. That seems well worth delving into further -- why are there all these symmetries inherent in the universe?  Should we be surprised by that?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm &#8212; ok, so it seems like all of the reasons why beauty=truth are either mundane (e.g., the equations only look beautiful because we write them that way) or they&#8217;re a consequence of statistical laws.</p>
<p>The one exception is your description of how symmetry in the universe leads to simple and symmetrical (hence beautiful) equations. That seems well worth delving into further &#8212; why are there all these symmetries inherent in the universe?  Should we be surprised by that?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: quba</title>
		<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>quba</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:43:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clockbackward.wordpress.com/?p=242#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Hi,

We have just added your latest post &quot;Does Beauty Equal Truth in Physics and Math?&quot; to our &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scienz.info&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; Directory of 

Science &lt;/a&gt; . You can check the inclusion of the post  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scienz.info/story.php?title=does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math-1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; here &lt;/a&gt; . We are delighted to invite you to 

submit all your future posts to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scienz.info&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;directory&lt;/a&gt; and get a huge base of visitors to 

your website.


Warm Regards

Scienz.info Team

http://www.scienz.info</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>We have just added your latest post &#8220;Does Beauty Equal Truth in Physics and Math?&#8221; to our <a href="http://www.scienz.info" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.scienz.info?referer=');"> Directory of </p>
<p>Science </a> . You can check the inclusion of the post  <a href="http://www.scienz.info/story.php?title=does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math-1" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.scienz.info/story.php?title=does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math-1&amp;referer=');"> here </a> . We are delighted to invite you to </p>
<p>submit all your future posts to the <a href="http://www.scienz.info" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.scienz.info?referer=');">directory</a> and get a huge base of visitors to </p>
<p>your website.</p>
<p>Warm Regards</p>
<p>Scienz.info Team</p>
<p><a href="http://www.scienz.info" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.scienz.info?referer=');">http://www.scienz.info</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clockbackward</title>
		<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>clockbackward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 14:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clockbackward.wordpress.com/?p=242#comment-23</guid>
		<description>You don’t need to be a theist or Platonist to find art beautiful, or music beautiful, or sunsets beautiful, or people beautiful, so why should you need to be one to find mathematics beautiful? As Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines it, beauty is “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit.” As many mathematicians and physicists will confirm, equations have the potential to “pleasurably exalt the mind”. It is an empirical fact that some equations in mathematics and physics are considered beautiful by many practitioners. This article attempts to address the question of whether equations that humans consider to be beautiful are in fact more likely to be ‘true’.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You don’t need to be a theist or Platonist to find art beautiful, or music beautiful, or sunsets beautiful, or people beautiful, so why should you need to be one to find mathematics beautiful? As Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines it, beauty is “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit.” As many mathematicians and physicists will confirm, equations have the potential to “pleasurably exalt the mind”. It is an empirical fact that some equations in mathematics and physics are considered beautiful by many practitioners. This article attempts to address the question of whether equations that humans consider to be beautiful are in fact more likely to be ‘true’.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosa Lichtenstein</title>
		<link>http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/03/11/does-beauty-equal-truth-in-physics-and-math/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosa Lichtenstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 10:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clockbackward.wordpress.com/?p=242#comment-22</guid>
		<description>As a mathematician myself, I appreciate these comments. But, unless one is theist, or a Platonist, why should mathematics be &#039;beautiful&#039;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a mathematician myself, I appreciate these comments. But, unless one is theist, or a Platonist, why should mathematics be &#8216;beautiful&#8217;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
