Q&A: Mathematics, Acher, and Rabbi Meir
Mathematics, Acher, and Rabbi Meir
Question
Hello to the honored Rabbi Michael Abraham, may he live long and well.
1. Even according to your view, mathematics is connected to the physical universe, because what is a number at all without a universe that can be divided into numbers and calculations? Besides that, mathematics itself is measured against the physical universe: if a mathematician invents a calculation that does not work out in the real world, the calculation will be thrown in the trash. By the way, is ordinary language different from mathematics? After all, it too speaks in abstract concepts that emerged from the physical universe, except that it explains the world in a more emotional way.
2. The story is well known about Rabbi Meir, who studied from his teacher Acher and said that he "took the inside and threw away the peel." Rabbi Meir is mentioned favorably for this approach. In contrast, Acher himself, who studied heretical books, is mentioned negatively. Surely Acher himself, when he was still fit, treated those books in the same way—"he took the inside," etc.?
Answer
- Mathematics is connected to the physical universe, but in the sense of inspiration. We can define the concept of number or triangle because of experiences and familiarity that we acquired through our experience, but these are only didactic means. In the end, these concepts have an existence independent of the universe. I gave the example of Euclidean geometry, which is the most confusing example because it is a mathematical field that was essentially born as a description of the world. And yet, general relativity shows that it does not describe our universe exactly, only approximately. Does that mean the system is undefined or worthless? Absolutely not. As a mathematical field it remains as it is; it is only physics that turned out, for us, to be different.
What does language have to do with emotion, and what does any of this have to do with our discussion? I didn’t understand.
2. There are two distinctions here: a. Acher read heretical books, not good books wrapped in heresy (with a shell of heresy). In his books, the content itself was heresy, not just the shell. b. Apparently Acher was not able to separate the grain from the chaff, while Rabbi Meir was.