ILLC-LIRa January 2019

illc-lira@list.uva.nl

1 participants
4 discussions

LIRa Session: Gabrielle Gramelsberger
by LIRa Seminar 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

Dear all, Tomorrow we will have our next LIRa session. Please, find the details below: Speaker: Gabrielle Gramelsberger Date and Time: Thursday, January 31st 2019, 16:30-18:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: The challenge of non-linearity and the need for computer-based modelling and simulation in science. Abstract. In 1946 John von Neumann stated, “the advance of analysis is [...] stagnant along the entire front of non-linear problems. We believe, therefore, that it is now time to concentrate on effecting the transition to [digital] devices, and that this will increase the power of the approach in question to an unprecedented extent.” [Goldstine and von Neumann, 1946] This statement, which is still true, marked the beginning of computer-based modelling and simulation in science, although it took several years to build adequate computers and develop rules for delegating mathematics to the computer, amongst them the famous von Neumann stability analysis. However, from this point on the very nature of science changed and has increasingly turned computational. Today, computer-based modelling and simulation are expanding the methodological repertoire of scientific theory and experiment/observation, helping researchers “extend themselves”—as philosopher Paul Humphreys aptly outlined in 2004; metaphorically comparing simulations with microscopes, but mathematical ones. From a philosophical perspective these “extending capacities” of computer-based modelling and simulation are of interest. The paper will present the historical and contemporary aspects of struggling with the challenge of non-linearity. It will pose the questions as to whether the challenge of non- linearity is rooted in the cognitive boundaries of Anschauung as addressed by Immanuel Kant back in 1781, whether these cognitive boundaries reappear in the problem of Entscheidbarkeit [Hilbert, 1900], and what they mean for epistemic limitations in computer-based modelling and simulation. Finally, it will be discuss whether a logical framework could help to grasp the complexity of today’s computational sciences. References Herman H. Goldstine and John von Neumann. 1963 [1946]. On the Principles of Large Scale Computing Machines. Collected Works (vol. 5), (ed. by John von Neumann and A. H. Taub), 1–32. Oxford Pergamon. Paul Humphreys. 2004. Extending Ourselves. Computational Sciences, Empiricism, and Scientific Method. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Immanuel Kant. 1993 [1781, 1787]. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, (ed. by Raymund Schmidt). Hamburg: Meiner 1993. David Hilbert. 1932 [1900]. Mathematische Probleme. Gesammelte Abhandlungen (vol. 1), (ed. by David Hilbert), 290-329. Berlin: Springer. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

LIRa Session reminder: Dag Westerstahl
by LIRa Seminar 28 Jan '19

28 Jan '19

Dear all, We would like to remind you that today, at 16:30, Dag Westerstahl will give a talk at our LIRa seminar. Please find the details below: Speaker: Dag Westerstahl Date and Time: Monday, January 28th 2019, 16:30-18:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Logicality revisited: constants vs. consequence. Abstract. There is an abstract Galois duality between (sets of) constants and consequence relations that I will explore, and argue that it gives some insight into both notions, and in particular into the notion of a logical constant. This leads in a natural way to a question posed already by Carnap in 1943, but rather neglected since: To what extent do the properties of a logical consequence relation fix the meaning of the logical constants in the language? Carnap asked this about classical propositional logic, but the question makes sense for any logic. It has a precise and satisfactory answer for propositional and first-order logic, which I will state, and then go on to ask Carnap’s question for modal logic. The situation there is similar to, but also interestingly different from, that in first-order logic, and some new conceptual issues, and some mildly interesting facts, arise. In particular, we get a new perspective on neighborhood semantics for modal logic. This is joint work with Denis Bonnay. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

LIRa Session: Gabrielle Gramelsberger
by LIRa Seminar 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Dear all, Apart from Dag Westerstahl\'s talk (on Monday the 28th) which we announced earlier this week, there will be another LIRa session next week, on Thursday the 31th. Our speaker is Gabrielle Gramelsberger. Please find the details below: Speaker: Gabrielle Gramelsberger Date and Time: Thursday, January 31st 2019, 16:30-18:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: The challenge of non-linearity and the need for computer-based modelling and simulation in science. Abstract. In 1946 John von Neumann stated, “the advance of analysis is […] stagnant along the entire front of non-linear problems. We believe, therefore, that it is now time to concentrate on effecting the transition to [digital] devices, and that this will increase the power of the approach in question to an unprecedented extent.” [Goldstine and von Neumann, 1946] This statement, which is still true, marked the beginning of computer-based modelling and simulation in science, although it took several years to build adequate computers and develop rules for delegating mathematics to the computer, amongst them the famous von Neumann stability analysis. However, from this point on the very nature of science changed and has increasingly turned computational. Today, computer-based modelling and simulation are expanding the methodological repertoire of scientific theory and experiment/observation, helping researchers “extend themselves”—as philosopher Paul Humphreys aptly outlined in 2004; metaphorically comparing simulations with microscopes, but mathematical ones. >From a philosophical perspective these “extending capacities” of computer-based modelling and simulation are of interest. The paper will present the historical and contemporary aspects of struggling with the challenge of non-linearity. It will pose the questions as to whether the challenge of non- linearity is rooted in the cognitive boundaries of Anschauung as addressed by Immanuel Kant back in 1781, whether these cognitive boundaries reappear in the problem of Entscheidbarkeit [Hilbert, 1900], and what they mean for epistemic limitations in computer-based modelling and simulation. Finally, it will be discuss whether a logical framework could help to grasp the complexity of today’s computational sciences. References Herman H. Goldstine and John von Neumann. 1963 [1946]. On the Principles of Large Scale Computing Machines. Collected Works (vol. 5), (ed. by John von Neumann and A. H. Taub), 1–32. Oxford Pergamon. Paul Humphreys. 2004. Extending Ourselves. Computational Sciences, Empiricism, and Scientific Method. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Immanuel Kant. 1993 [1781, 1787]. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, (ed. by Raymund Schmidt). Hamburg: Meiner 1993. David Hilbert. 1932 [1900]. Mathematische Probleme. Gesammelte Abhandlungen (vol. 1), (ed. by David Hilbert), 290-329. Berlin: Springer. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

LIRa Session: Dag Westerstahl
by LIRa Seminar 22 Jan '19

22 Jan '19

Dear all, The next LIRa session will take place on Monday, January 28th. Our speaker is Dag Westerstahl. Please, find the details below: Speaker: Dag Westerstahl Date and Time: Monday, January 28th 2019, 16:30-18:00 Venue: ILLC Seminar Room F1.15, Science Park 107. Title: Logicality revisited: constants vs. consequence. Abstract. There is an abstract Galois duality between (sets of) constants and consequence relations that I will explore, and argue that it gives some insight into both notions, and in particular into the notion of a logical constant. This leads in a natural way to a question posed already by Carnap in 1943, but rather neglected since: To what extent do the properties of a logical consequence relation fix the meaning of the logical constants in the language? Carnap asked this about classical propositional logic, but the question makes sense for any logic. It has a precise and satisfactory answer for propositional and first-order logic, which I will state, and then go on to ask Carnap’s question for modal logic. The situation there is similar to, but also interestingly different from, that in first-order logic, and some new conceptual issues, and some mildly interesting facts, arise. In particular, we get a new perspective on neighborhood semantics for modal logic. This is joint work with Denis Bonnay. Hope to see you there! The LIRa team

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

ILLC-LIRa January 2019