It may be said that the principle of simple laws is purely heuristic,
and of course this is true to a considerable extent. No sensible
mathematician would test a complicated formula before testing a simple
one. But the remarkable thing is that the simple formula so often turns
out right. From the trend of physics, it seems as though complication
were geographical rather than legal. Organic compounds have an
immensely complicated structure, but there is no reason to suppose that
their fundamental laws are other than those which govern the hydrogen
atom. Professor J. B. Haldane, it is true, thinks otherwise, and so
do all varieties of vitalists. But, to a layman, their arguments seem
inconclusive, and they are rejected by many competent authorities. It
is therefore at least a tenable hypothesis that all matter is governed
by very simple laws. This is so remarkable that it almost suggests
some relation to Mr Keynes's "principle of limitation of variety,"
and seems to confirm his hint that Nature may be really like the urn
containing white and black balls which plays such a prominent part in
the theory of probability. Some Mendelians would make us think of human
beings in this way. Suppose there were a hundred pairs of characters,
, , , , , , etc., such that every
human being possessed by inheritance one but not both of the characters
in each pair. This would make the number of differing human embryos
—i.e. about . If this is thought too few,
we can take more pairs of characters. Views of this sort cannot be
rejected out of hand, and they are strongly suggested by the success
of[Pg 234] induction and the prevalence of simple laws. Let us, therefore, ask
once more: What evidence is there that simple laws prevail, and how
much reason have we to be surprised by the degree of their prevalence?
As I have pointed out on a former occasion, it would be fallacious to
argue inductively from the simplicity of the laws we have discovered
to the probable simplicity of undiscovered laws. For, if some laws are
simple and some complicated, we are likely to discover the simple laws
first. We have toi proceed more cautiously. First, is it surprising
that there are any simple laws? Secondly, have we any ground for
believing, as was suggested just now, that all phenomena are
governed by simple laws?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account