I Linus Pauling on the Role of Numbers in Science: A Request for Reference

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trying2Learn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quote
AI Thread Summary
Linus Pauling reportedly stated during a lecture that "numbers are just placeholders for ideas" after a student pointed out a numerical error he made. This anecdote highlights Pauling's perspective on the role of numbers in scientific discourse, emphasizing that the essence of science lies in hypotheses rather than mere calculations. Despite several searches, a definitive reference for this quote remains elusive, with many sources providing anecdotal evidence rather than concrete citations. The discussion reflects a broader understanding of the relationship between numerical accuracy and conceptual thinking in science. The quest for a precise reference continues among forum participants.
Trying2Learn
Messages
375
Reaction score
57
TL;DR Summary
Request for reference
Hello!

I am hoping someone can find me a reference for this anecdote.

I have a vague memory of reading this somewhere (about ten years ago) and would love to have a reference (I could have it all wrong).

But here goes...

Linus Pauling was giving a lecture when a student raised his hand to point out a numerical error Pauling had made.

Pauling responded by saying something like, "No matter... numbers are just placeholders for ideas."

Has anyone heard of this, before? And, if so, a reference to an exact quote?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I have read a dozen of quotations from Pauling now, e.g.
If you want to have good ideas you must have many ideas. Most of them will be wrong, and what you have to learn is which ones to throw away.
but the one with the placeholders was not among them.
 
Trying2Learn said:
Summary:: Request for reference

Has anyone heard of this, before? And, if so, a reference to an exact quote?

Google searching the phrase and associating it with Pauling generates a couple hits, but they are pretty anecdotal...

https://statanalytica.com/blog/arithmetic-vs-mathematics/

The most evident distinction is that number-crunching is about numbers and science is about hypothesis. In school, I have a striking memory of Linus Pauling¹ conveying a visitor address and subsequent to scribbling hypothetical science all more than three chalkboards, an understudy lifted his hand and brought up that multiple times 8 had been duplicated wrong in one of the previous advances.

Pauling’s answer was, “Goodness, that… numbers are only placeholders for the idea.” And, he just waved away the way that the numerical end was clearly not precise. Presently, that was in the sixties before the abundant access to adding machines and PCs, so his point is considerably increasingly legitimate today.
There is a "1" that looks like a pointer to a reference about Pauling, but I'm not finding the reference at the bottom of that web page...
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top