The Unknown

The idea that there is no definite answer to some of the deepest questions of science has been circulating within scientific thought for some time. Various fields have put forth descriptions of what might be considered the Queen of Science: The Uncertainty. This concept, rather than being a single unified theory, is more a constellation of ideas pointing to the inherent limitations of human knowledge and understanding. Three notable contributions to this realm of thought are Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, Tarski's Undefinability Theorem, and G?del's Incompleteness Theorems.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (1927)

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, formulated in 1927 by Werner Heisenberg, is a fundamental theory in quantum mechanics. It asserts that there is a limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, known as complementary variables (e.g., position and momentum), can be known simultaneously. Enforcing certainty in one variable leads to the collapse of the system, making the other variable indeterminate. This principle has profound implications for our understanding of the physical universe, suggesting that at a fundamental level, nature does not allow for absolute precision in measurement. Consequently, this implies that uncertainty is a fundamental aspect of the natural world.

Tarski's Undefinability Theorem (1936)

Tarski's Undefinability Theorem, proposed by Alfred Tarski in 1936, states that truth in a formal language cannot be defined within that language. In simpler terms, it is impossible to create a formal system that can define the concept of truth for its own statements. This theorem highlights the limitations of formal systems and the boundaries of mathematical logic. It suggests that there will always be aspects of truth that elude formalization and complete understanding, reinforcing the idea that some degree of uncertainty and incompleteness is inevitable in our quest for knowledge.

G?del's Incompleteness Theorems (1931)

G?del's Incompleteness Theorems, presented by Kurt G?del in 1931, further extend the concept of inherent limitations within formal systems. The first theorem states that in any consistent formal system that is capable of expressing arithmetic, there are true statements that cannot be proven within the system. The second theorem asserts that no such system can prove its own consistency. These theorems imply that there are always truths that lie beyond the reach of formal mathematical proof, suggesting that our understanding of mathematics and logic is fundamentally limited.

Embracing Uncertainty

The results of these theories have not been warmly welcomed by all scientists. Many are still quite uncomfortable with the idea that there is no definite view of the universe's fundamental questions. However, perhaps they are missing an essential interpretation of what uncertainty at the core of our existence really means. The fact that uncertainty exists could be the best thing that has happened to science. Rather than attempting to solve the unsolvable, we can change our perception and build systems that allow uncertainty to visit us.

What this means is that, given the strong evidence that certain knowledge is fundamentally unknowable, we should ensure that we do not strive for absolute certainty in the way we set up our experiments and socio-economic systems. It is about time that our socio-economic systems are consistent with our scientific thought and are built with the uncertainty principle in mind so they don't collapse due to ill design. This is indeed a tricky proposition! How do we build systems that serve our needs, not by predicting the future, but by allowing the future to unfold while still being ready to embrace it?

A Lesson from Scuba Diving

Perhaps it is easier to explain this concept using the culture of safety and kindness that is at the core of scuba diving. This culture allows for proper mitigation of risks prior to the dive and assures that all divers are ready and make their own assessments about their preparedness to embrace the dive experience. This is critical as diving typically occurs in an environment that cannot be controlled; therefore, divers need to be ready to deal with the unexpected in a calm and organized manner.

The training focuses on preparing the diver to remain composed and learn responses to known risks. This way, the risk of injury or death is minimized, and a diver can embrace the unknown relaxed and open-minded. Embracing the unknown does not mean that we are completely negligent about what we already know. Instead, we create an environment where known risks can be managed adequately, but we do not lock ourselves in a computer software-like system with known and calculated outcomes. This allows us to embrace the Real.

Quantum Systems: A Playground for Intellectual Exploration

Building quantum systems can be a lot of fun for scientists. Quantum thinking really opens up a lot of potential for pure intellectual exploration. It is important that a healthy quantum system has uncertainty at its core, but this should not be understood in the same way as gambling. Gambling is certain; it is either heads or tails. The outcome of gambling is contained in the game design. It is calculated and predictable in its odds. Game thinking is limiting uncertainty. There might be ways to define "higher" types of games, but gambling games are fundamentally limited. In contrast, uncertainty in quantum systems is fundamentally different, encompassing a profound indeterminacy at a deep level that defies such binary predictability. This unique nature of quantum uncertainty fosters a rich landscape for innovation and discovery, making the field of quantum systems both challenging and exhilarating for those engaged in it.

Welcoming the Unknown

Accepting the unknown is like being polite to "the other" or "the situation." Instead of telling them who they are and what we expect them to do, we welcome them into our House. It is important to understand that not everyone is ready to experience the magnificent uncertainty. Some people or systems may not be conducive to this approach and may require different handling. However, for those ready to embrace it, welcoming uncertainty can lead to a more flexible, resilient, and ultimately enriching engagement with the world.