The Maths of Magic.

Post Reply New Topic

I think I've read all of Phil's works, including his space-alien prons and a few one-offs.

Back to the topic...

I'd like to see a listing of: objective mathematical principles for "magic", including descriptors like velocity of propagation, wavelengths, and carrier particles; predictably accurate devices like amplifiers and detectors; devices that can be "tweaked" to vary the effect, its magnitude, and point of focus; et cetera.

No one claiming to know anything about "magic" has yet to provide those things, but if there is any reality to "magic", then codifying magical principles into mathematical models should be easy for anyone who is a real expert in both realms of study.

Hmmm, seems you are suggesting that the only thing that will suffice is things that have already been confirmed by science, as another said, in that case it would already be known? So what's the point of the thread? Surely if someone had such evidence and mathematical equations they would have already come forward with ground breaking science. What mathematical equation explains how we exist to have this conversation? No, not the big bang, how did the energy come into existence to allow the big bang? How long did that energy exist before the big bang? In what space/void did the energy exist? how long has that space/void existed? Produce those mathematical equations.

Reality doesn't have to comply with rules man creates, it is what it is, and what it is can't be confirmed, not even by science. Science can only confirm, measure or calculate particular aspects of reality, it can't define what reality is or how it came to be.

To get back to the thread tittle, why even post the thread asking for things you are already aware do not exist? I'm more than certain if someone did have these ground breaking new scientific discoveries, WP would not be the first place they presented their findings.

First, I am suggesting no such thing. Second, new discoveries are being made through scientific inquiry every day.To see if anyone has any data on magic that could be put into mathematical terms.Not necessarily; as I said, new discoveries are being made every day. So why not apply scientific methods to the study of magic? We may discover something so fundamental that scientists would simply have to notice.Too esoteric. Remember, I am looking for the fundamentals -- velocity of propagation, wavelengths, et cetera -- not philosophical arguments on the meaning of existence.Again, too esoteric. The fundamentals of gravity were discovered long before the concept of the Big Bang, so let's not get involved in creating a universe before we know how this one works.You really don't get it, do you? I'm looking for simple answers to simple questions, and you want to discuss meta-physical philosophy. Or are you just evading and derailing the subject of this thread?Actually, humans have been using scientific methods to delve into and describe reality for hundreds (if not thousands) of years. The principles they've discovered have been confirmed over and over again, thus increasing our understanding of the universe and how it works.Evidence, please? Just because some aspects of reality have yet to be defined does not mean that they are indefinable.I am not saying they do not exist. I am figuratively "opening the door" to a possible field of scientific inquiry. If you have nothing to offer, then just admit it, and I will ignore your posts on this subject from then on.Same here. WP is not a peer-review journal for scientific papers.

However, if someone has even one little mathematical formula that accurately and consistently predicts the outcome of even the simplest magical process, I would like to see it.

(And no, I don't mean something like "m =\= r", where 'm' is magic and 'r' is reality.)

So here's your chance, true believers! Show me what you have! If you have anything to offer, let's see it!

 Crickets  Operators are standing by!

Then you are correct, it's pointless for anyone to post here, so be prepared to listen for crickets, which is basicly a way of saying, no one can produce the information that I request so anything that can be said about something you would consider 'magical' doesn't exist because of lack of evidence. That's clearly why you are stating that you will hear crickets. Which basically leads back to, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, yet that's what you imply and attempt to express. If you have read science books then surely you have heard the other famous slogan , just because you can't confirm something that occured in reality by scientific method doses't make it any less of a reality. So, now you can listen to your crickets...

This is a bit confused. Are you talking to mystics or illusionists/stage magicians? Two very different things.

Also comparing apples to apples maybe (ie. big, messy, chaotic systems), give me the mathematics of weather.

I barely passed math in high school. But if you’re talking illusions, well, between math and physics it’s easy to come up with mathematical models to explain them. You have smoke ans you have mirrors. What are the properties of smoke, mirrors, and...oh, I dunno, maybe even light that work in concert to produce magical effects? Keep in mind I’m not talking about anything supernatural, but rather the effects of natural phenomena that are manipulated to produce a specific cognitive effect.

Supernatural magic isn’t possible. Let’s begin with the single assumption that God as the Supreme Being of the universe exists. Supernatural magic presupposes that God can be manipulated into bending reality to suit the whim of the magician. This means man is greater than his creator, which means man, NOT God, is the supreme being. If you can establish that God is, then the creation being greater than its creator is absurd. Magic is the practice of subjecting God to the will of man. Therefore, magic cannot have any basis in reality. The Bible confirms this when, in Exodus, Moses is in a contest against Pharaoh’s magicians. In the original Hebrew, the magicians are described as having matched Moses “by their light,” suggesting they relied on ILLUSION and misdirection rather than some mystical power. Moses possesses no such power but rather acts as an agent or representative of God. Moses can only do what God wants, not produce supernatural stunts at will.

This creates a problem for science because it’s not man’s place to bend God to his will. Placing God under a microscope and reducing God to science and math actually would be the job of a “real” magician in the supernatural sense. Some people say the danger would be in negating the need for faith, but I argue that God doesn’t require that kind of faith. Christianity doesn’t actually require a belief in God. It requires faith in the atonement provided by Jesus on the cross for removing the sins of mankind. One may draw conclusions about Jesus and the existence of God from there and say believing in one without the other is absurd, but merely “believing in God” isn’t the point: Even Satan “believes.” The point is what the role of faith actually IS, and putting God under the microscope poses no real danger in terms of faith. The danger lies in what it means if God COULD be put under the microscope—is man superior to God? If so, then magic is possible and quantifiable under Fnord’s standards.

The other danger is EVEN IF God allowed Himself to be put under the microscope for the purpose of revealing Himself to man, in other words according to His will and not ours, it is still the role of the scientist to measure, draw conclusions, and explain. In science, nothing is taken “on faith” (not counting methodology, but I’m not arguing against empiricism here, even though I could). A scientist would not be able to say conclusively “this is God.” Even if he came to that conclusion, there’s no guarantee EVERY scientist would come to the same conclusion. And even if they all did, there’s STILL no guarantee the rest of the world would accept scientific consensus. And if they DID, they’d STILL argue over who God really is, whether the studies are accurate or biased, or whether it’s just some conspiracy within the scientific community to brainwash the population and take over the world. Sound familiar?

I dare say this has already happened. Religion has had these headaches since the beginning of time.

So...

We can logically conclude that 1) Supernatural magic is impossible and 2) Supernatural phenomena by its nature is unobservable in scientific terms. Note that I never said supernatural events are impossible or entirely unobservable. I believe in both the possibility and the observability of them. But I believe God acts on His terms and not ours. I believe those things can be inferred from nature and that objectice reality reflects God’s plan for humanity in terms of how our earthly lives are to be conducted. Whether your morality is derived from natural order or the Bible, they are one and the same. It’s just as important for believers not to engage in wishful thinking, and I find it sad that Christians treat their own faith like believing in fairy tales.

Sorry for taking so long with that...but with that out of the way, let’s get back to math and “real” magic.

Because of the aforementioned issues with magic and the supernatural, such magic having no basis in reason or objective reality, we must turn to realm of magical religion (which IS wishful thinking) and fiction. It seems the world of Harry Potter is the most authoritative source on this subject, but there are some Egyptian sources among others throughout the ancient world. The Bible renders incantations taboo, therefore we know casting spells goes back beyond the Bronze Age. There are what I call synthetic religions/cults, basically Wiccan variations, that rely on some form of ritual magic. So if you want to get all mathematical about it, you’re basically reduced to correlational studies (in real world application) or statistical observation in fiction.

With fiction, you have the problem of making the story interesting to the reader. In Star Wars, you have The Force. The Force might best be explained in QM terms with a symbiotic relationship between humanoids and some interdimensional being. When the prequel trilogy explains this, the story falls flat—not because it destroys the magic of the Force (the Force IS real and observable in Star Wars), but because the explanation is unnecessary and clutters the plot.

In Harry Potter, magic is basically science and, to the wizarding world, very much objectively real. What you DON’T get out of HP is how spells and potions originated, or how magical inventions were made. HP succeeds where SW fails: we don’t NEED to know. That is the role of witches and wizards to invent new spells and potions. In their world, magic apparently “just works.” The “how why what” of magic to them isn’t any more important than the thorough knowledge of internal combustion engine is necessary to operate a motor vehicle, or knowledge of coding is necessary to operate a computer. The real wizards of OUR world (nonfictional) are computer programmers and engineers. You don’t hear much about their analogs in HP, but it is hinted at in the novels that they do or did exist at one time or another. From there you could speculate about some alternate world working in tandem with our own with interdimensional forces that seem to rewrite the book on reality. Once again, something like QM would be quite useful in describing phenomena in HP. TheOneWhoMustNotBeNamed even exists primarily in his disembodied form, which suggests the possibility of conscious entities born with ability to transcend the known universe.

Star Trek is in effect magical for the same exact reason. The difference is with ST the storylines depend on an understanding of such problems already being solved, whereas no attempt is made in HP. The woo BS is already dealt with in ST whereas in HP and SW it’s just not that important. ST might be HP after muggles figured everything out. HP was already interacting with ET before Cochran saw the pattern for the warp drive in his own puke. But HP wouldn’t CALL them ET, yet the concept of other worlds would not be unknown to them...which makes you wonder: who violated the prime directive first? The Vulcans, or someone else? And in LOTR, what REALLY happened to the elves?

I'm referring to the "magic" that is allegedly outside our current understanding of physics -- not the Penn & Teller stuff, but the supposedly real magic that wiccans, witches, and modern-day sorcerers claim to practice.

I wish I could, but the mathematical models used by NOAA, the NWS, and other governmental agencies would not fit on the average desktop PC.

....and they aren't accurate.

... and the accuracy is always improving as the measurements and analyses improve.

50 years ago, we were lucky to get a 30 minute warning of a tornado. Nowadays, we can get accurate warnings of tornado-producing storms up to a week in advance.

The trouble is that stupid people won't evacuate or take shelter because they believe that the weather forecasts aren't accurate.

Tornado outbreaks are better predicted, you can spot rotation by simply looking at a radar. Weather prediction is not accurate and never will be because you can't track every molecule nor account for all factors. It may improve, it will never be 100% accurate.

Doppler radar, which was not in widespread use for weather forecasting 50 years ago.Do you have a point to make, or are you just stating the obvious for the sake of having a post to submit?

Let's get back on-subject, please. And if you have nothing to contribute to the subject, then please don't derail the thread again. Thank you.

Thanks for clarifying. Then I would place that in a Hogwart’s area of discipline—that is, a basic understanding of magic is all that is required of practitioners with a view to expanding that depending on the skill and desire of the participant. You don’t need to know the intricacies of internal combustion to drive a car, nor need you know computer language to make a slideshow presentation.

What you’re asking isn’t reasonable or possible, and you already know why. Let’s suppose Wicca was more than mere fantasy and wishful thinking. The simple question is how do you intend to capture the supernatural in such a way as to study it? All you have in objective terms is:

1. It was a hot, dry summer.
2. A priest and priestess performed the Great Rite.
3. It rained.
4. Great Rite was performed X number of times, and it rained each time.
5. There is a x:y correlation between the Great Rite and rainy summers.

Wiccans are going to view this as causation no matter what. To everyone else, “where is the evidence???” Setting aside my own views of Wicca, I want to know what the standard of proof is and what methods you’re going to go about measuring supernatural intervention every time a spell calls down the god/goddess and how you intend to observe the deities themselves. If we give Wicca the benefit of the doubt, and HONESTLY do it (*giggle* *snort*), can we be reasonable and can we also take observed results seriously? EVEN IF Wiccan magic was real, I don’t believe current math/science can ever be reasonably applied to it, nor do I think skeptics will ever be convinced even if they had mathematical-logical proof/scientific evidence that seemed to confirm it.

That's exactly my point.

If a clean set of equations resolved 'magic' BMW would have eco-fiendly carbon fiber brooms with heated gel handles and you wouldn't have to load Elon Musk's flamethrowers with anything - they'd just work.

If a clean set of equations exists for describing how to make a broom and rider fly, then the auto industry, the airline industry, and the drone industry would all go out of business.

But think how carbon-friendly that would be!