Abstract
In recent decades, experimental mathematics has emerged as a new branch of mathematics. This new branch is defined less by its subject matter, and more by its use of computer assisted reasoning. Experimental mathematics uses a variety of computer assisted approaches to verify or prove mathematical hypotheses. For example, there is “number crunching” such as searching for very large Mersenne primes, and showing that the Goldbach conjecture holds for all even numbers less than 2 × 1018. There are “verifications” of hypotheses which, while not definitive proofs, provide strong support for those hypotheses, and there are proofs involving an enormous amount of computer hours, which cannot be surveyed by any one mathematician in a lifetime. There have been several attempts to argue that one or another aspect of experimental mathematics shows that mathematics now accepts empirical or inductive methods, and hence shows mathematical apriorism to be false. Assessing this argument is complicated by the fact that there is no agreed definition of what precisely experimental mathematics is. However, I argue that on any plausible account of ’experiment’ these arguments do not succeed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Appel K. (1984) The use of the computer in the proof of the four color theorem. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 128(1): 35–39
Appel K., Haken W., Koch J. (1977) Every planar map is four colorable. Illinois Journal of Mathematics 21: 429–567
Baker A. (2008) Experimental mathematics. Erkenntnis 68: 331–344
Baker, A. (2009). Non-deductive methods in mathematics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2009 edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/mathematics-nondeductive/.
Barendregt, H., & Wiedijk, F. (2005). The challenge of computer mathematics. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 363(1835), 2351–2375. The Nature of Mathematical Proof (Oct. 15, 2005).
Borwein J. (2008) Implications of experimental mathematics for the philosophy of mathematics. In: Gold B., Simons R. A. (eds) Proof and other dilemmas: Mathematics and philosophy. Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC, pp 33–59
Burge, T. (1998). Computer proof, apriori knowledge, and other minds. Philosophical Perspectives, 12, Language, Mind, and Ontology, 1–37.
Chaitin G. J. (1993) Randomness in arithmetic and the decline and fall of reductionism in pure mathematics. Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science 50: 314–328
Chang, K. (2004, April 6). In math, computers don’t lie. Or do they? New York Times, pp. F1, F4.
Corfield D. (2003) Towards a philosophy of real mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Davis, P. J. (1972). Fidelity in mathematical discourse: Is one and one really two? American Mathematical Monthly, LXXIX, 252–263.
Detlefsen M., Luker M. (1980) The four-color theorem and mathematical proof. Journal of Philosophy 77(12): 803–820
Fallis D. (1997) The epistemic status of probabilistic proof. Journal of Philosophy 94(4): 165–186
Goldstick D. (1977) A little-noticed feature of a priori truth. The Personalist 58: 131–133
Gødel, K. (1983) What is cantor’s continuum Problem? In B. Paul & P. Hilary (pp. 470–485). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. (Reprinted in Philosophy of Mathematics, 2nd ed.)
Gonthier G. (2008) Formal proof—the four-color theorem. Notices of the AMS 55(11): 1382–1393
Hales, T. (1998). The Kepler conjecture, (and updates). http://www.math.pitt.edu/~thales.
Hales T. (2008) Formal proof. Notices of the AMS 55(11): 1370–1380
Hales, T., et al. (2011). The flyspeck project. http://code.google.com/p/flyspeck/wiki/FlyspeckFactSheet.
Harrison J. (2008) Formal proof—theory and practice. Notices of the AMS 55(11): 1395–1406
Hersh R. (1997) What is mathematics really?. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Jaffe A., Quinn F. (1993) ‘Theoretical mathematics’: Toward a cultural synthesis of mathematics and theoretical physics. Bulletin (New Series) of the AMS 29(1): 1–13
Kitcher P. (1983) The nature of mathematical knowledge. Oxford University Press, New York
Kitcher, P. (2000) A priori knowledge revisited. In P. Boghossian & C. Peacocke (Eds.), New essays on the a priori (pp. 65–91). New York: Oxford University Press.
Kripke S. (1972) Naming and necessity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Lam C. H., Thiel L., Swiercz S. (1989) The non-existence of finite projective planes of order 10. Canadian Journal of Mathematics 41: 1117–1123
MacKenzie D. (1999) Slaying the Kraken: The sociohistory of a mathematical proof. Social Studies of Science 29(1): 7–60
McCune W. (1997) Solution of the Robbins problem. Journal of Automated Reasoning 19: 263–276
McEvoy, Mark. (2008) The epistemological status of computer proofs. Philosophia Mathematica, 16, 374–387.
Oliveira e Silva, T. Goldbach conjecture verification. http://www.ieeta.pt/~tos/goldbach.html.
Pollack, R. (1997). How to believe a machine-checked proof. Basic Research in Computer Science, 97(Report Series), 1–18.
Putnam, H. (1972). What is mathematical truth? In Mathematics, matter and method. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Resnik M. (1997) Mathematics as a science of patterns. Oxford University Press, New York
Robertson N., Sanders D., Seymour P., Thomas R. (1997) The four-colour theorem. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 70: 2–44
Sørensen, H. K. (2010). Exploratory experimentation in experimental mathematics: A glimpse at the PSLQ algorithm. In B. Löwe & T. Müller (Eds.), Phi MSAMP. Philosophy of mathematics: Sociological aspects and mathematical practice. London: College Publications. Texts in Philosophy, 11, pp. 341–360.
Swart E. R. (1980) The philosophical implications of the four-color. The American Mathematical Monthly 87(9): 697–707
Tymoczko T. (1979) The four-color problem and its philosophical significance. Journal of Philosophy 76: 57–82
Tymoczko T. (1980) Computers, proofs and mathematicians: A philosophical investigation of the four-color proof. Mathematics Magazine 53(3): 131–138
van Bendegem J. P. (1998) What, if anything, is an experiment in mathematics?. In: Anapolitanos D., Baltas A., Tsinorema S. (eds) Philosophy and the many faces of science. Rowman & Littlefield, London, pp 172–182
van Kerkhove B., van Bendegem J. P. (2008) Pi on Earth. Erkenntnis 68: 421–435
Wiedijk F. (2008) Formal proof—getting started. Notices of the AMS 55(11): 1408–1414
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McEvoy, M. Experimental mathematics, computers and the a priori. Synthese 190, 397–412 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-0035-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-0035-1