Is mathematics biology's next microscope ? What is your opinion?
Is mathematics biology's next microscope ?
I don't think mathematics is advanced enough to predict the life sciences... nor is enough known about biology for it to be described without the 230984239084029384908 "exceptions to the rules".
But hey, I'm probably wrong.
But hey, I'm probably wrong.
Yes. I think that biology can benefit a lot from more interaction with the more mathematical sciences. Looking at biological systems in a more control theory based way is one place to start. Look at the benefits that there are when you start combining biology with maths, we get MRI and CAT scans, ultrasound right the way through to laser tweezers. It's a good start, and I think that this type of interdisciplinary approach can only be good for everyone.
Intresting topic.
Maths has always suffered, I think, from the fact that it is associated as a science in itself in the public mind.
As we know, in reality it is a language and, to be pedantic, more of an art than a science. In fact most major universities in the UK offer their math degrees as BA not BSc. Math is used by science as the universal language for good reason - it is a tightly defined and unambiguous method of communication and is ideally suited to describing scientific concepts which require this. The downside is that the more tricky stuff has been consistently explained away as 'theoretical' or 'abberation due to math'. Think, for example, of non-linear equations....they were always dealt with quickly and imaginary solutions explained as something to ignore.
A major change occurred with the advent of 'Chaos' theory. Suddenly non-linear equations became sexy. Non-integer dimensions (like 2.3 dimensions etc) also became interesting (fractals are, in one definition, non-integer dimensional systems.
Scientists began to realise that these 'abberant' and difficult areas of math were actually telling us deep and meaningful things about reality and not just some toy for the mathematicians to play with.
Regards
Chris
Maths has always suffered, I think, from the fact that it is associated as a science in itself in the public mind.
As we know, in reality it is a language and, to be pedantic, more of an art than a science. In fact most major universities in the UK offer their math degrees as BA not BSc. Math is used by science as the universal language for good reason - it is a tightly defined and unambiguous method of communication and is ideally suited to describing scientific concepts which require this. The downside is that the more tricky stuff has been consistently explained away as 'theoretical' or 'abberation due to math'. Think, for example, of non-linear equations....they were always dealt with quickly and imaginary solutions explained as something to ignore.
A major change occurred with the advent of 'Chaos' theory. Suddenly non-linear equations became sexy. Non-integer dimensions (like 2.3 dimensions etc) also became interesting (fractals are, in one definition, non-integer dimensional systems.
Scientists began to realise that these 'abberant' and difficult areas of math were actually telling us deep and meaningful things about reality and not just some toy for the mathematicians to play with.
Regards
Chris
Bikerman's answer motivated me to write a new post entitled "Mathematics and reality"
Please take a look!
Please take a look!
Mathematics has already been applied to biology.
The pressure of air in your windpipe is directly proportional to the radius of your windpipe. The relanship is:
P[air] = k*r4
That is, if the radius contracts the pressure increases to the power of 4.
This is just one example.
Are you expecting the same big impact that mathematics had on physics and to a lesser extent chemistry. Biology is too sophisticated for simple model systems, like at best you can do reaction rates, enzyme activities etc, where this mathematics has already been well-defined in biochemistry. So the simple in-vitro methods, single biological reactions, have already been described mathematically. Look at ELISA's, enzyme kinetics, cell receptor mechanisms etc. Even Bioinformatics, including the information of DNA using the four bases, all using mathematical principles.
But since biology is such a complex process, it takes into account the sciences of biochemistry, chemistry, biophysics, mathematics, psychology, immunochemistry, etc. Hence each one is less obvious to the untrained eye.
The pressure of air in your windpipe is directly proportional to the radius of your windpipe. The relanship is:
P[air] = k*r4
That is, if the radius contracts the pressure increases to the power of 4.
This is just one example.
Are you expecting the same big impact that mathematics had on physics and to a lesser extent chemistry. Biology is too sophisticated for simple model systems, like at best you can do reaction rates, enzyme activities etc, where this mathematics has already been well-defined in biochemistry. So the simple in-vitro methods, single biological reactions, have already been described mathematically. Look at ELISA's, enzyme kinetics, cell receptor mechanisms etc. Even Bioinformatics, including the information of DNA using the four bases, all using mathematical principles.
But since biology is such a complex process, it takes into account the sciences of biochemistry, chemistry, biophysics, mathematics, psychology, immunochemistry, etc. Hence each one is less obvious to the untrained eye.
| sarapicoazul wrote: |
| Is mathematics biology's next microscope ? What is your opinion? |
in terms of behaviour maths is ALREADY and important tool for study, especially in areas of evolutionary game theory.
 |