Mathematica Principia Mathematica: Russell's Insightful Collaboration - Available Online?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mathematica
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on Russell and Whitehead's "Principia Mathematica," which aims to derive mathematics from fundamental logical concepts. Participants note that the book is complex, taking considerable effort to define basic concepts like natural numbers, and even proving simple arithmetic like 2 + 2 = 4. While it holds "awe" value, it is suggested that only those deeply versed in symbolic logic should attempt to read it in full. Some participants mention their experiences reading parts of the book and express skepticism about its accessibility, recommending alternatives like "Finnegans Wake" instead. There is also a brief mention of the confusion between Russell's work and Newton's similarly titled book, clarifying that the discussion is focused on the former. Overall, the consensus is that "Principia Mathematica" is more of a scholarly endeavor than casual reading.
MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
i read i think in russell's "problems in philosophy" that his book (that he wrote with witehead) were read by a handful of people, i wonder if anyone here read this mass, and is it availabale in the web?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have read parts of it- the whole thing would be far too much! Principia Mathematica was an attempt (not entirely sucessful) to derive mathematics from the most fundamental concepts of logic. About half-way through the book they have finally produced enough concepts to define the natural numbers- and then requires several pages to prove that 2+ 2= 4! It's worth a look just for the "awe" value, but unless you are a professor of symbolic logic, I would not recommend buying it or trying to read the whole thing.
 
i recommend reading finnegan's wake first.
 
There's a copy at my university, so I picked it up and read parts of it. It is a horrible, horrible mess.
 
Treadstone 71 said:
There's a copy at my university

there's THE copy of it at my university :-p
 
rhj23 said:
there's THE copy of it at my university :-p
All bragging rights are null and void unless you've actually tried to read the damn thing. Since I know that you haven't, you are not allowed to boast. ;)
 
HallsofIvy said:
I have read parts of it- the whole thing would be far too much! Principia Mathematica was an attempt (not entirely sucessful) to derive mathematics from the most fundamental concepts of logic. About half-way through the book they have finally produced enough concepts to define the natural numbers- and then requires several pages to prove that 2+ 2= 4! It's worth a look just for the "awe" value, but unless you are a professor of symbolic logic, I would not recommend buying it or trying to read the whole thing.

That is amazingly badass.

^Probably one of the few places in the world I can say this and have people either agree with me or not give it a second thought.
 
Try learning latin and then read it. It might be easier to read.
 
  • #10
scott1 said:
Try learning latin and then read it. It might be easier to read.
Learning mathematics and symbolic logic first would be better. While the title "Principia Mathematica" is Latin, the book itself was written in English. (Well, what's in between all the symbo's is English!)

It occurs to me that you may be thinking of Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. The very first post made it clear that the poster was talking about Russell and Whitehead's "Principia Mathematica".
 

Similar threads

  • Poll Poll
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
24K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
39
Views
10K
Back
Top