> Kenneth Boyd,
> 
> > Mathematics is Very Mystical.
> 
> Mystical is usually used in conjuntion with ideas like "Soul" or 
"God".  Perhaps a better word 
> would be "Mysterious"?  Or were you refering exclusively to Cohesive Math?
I have no experience with Cohesive Math.  I still have to make it over to 
your Web page on it.  [I have the website reference, still].
I'm running on several analogies [having had to work a general survey of 
800+ math]:
     1) The first fly-by-wire aircraft [Harrier jump jet?] had a design 
team composed only of mathematicians.  NO programmers, NO engineers.  In 
other words, mathematicians can learn the skills required to program or 
engineer fairly easily, but the reverse does NOT hold: programmers are 
usually not good at creating math, nor are engineers.
     Please remember than in the typical program lifecycle, 75% of coding 
time is DEBUGGING.  This is because the typical programmer is a 
mathematical incompetent.  I generally spend about 20% to 
25% of coding time debugging, often removing bugs that have not been 
explicitly demonstrated by 'testing'.  If one can prove that the source 
is bug-free, the only source of bugs is the compiler.  For those 
oddities, looking at the assembly listing does wonders.  Also, the risk 
of introducing new bugs when fixing old ones is greatly reduced--typical 
is 50%, while I can't measure it effectively--less than 5%.  The 
bug-introducing risks of optimization are also greatly reduced--I only 
have to consider it seriously when totally rewriting a data type in C++, 
and it usually doesn't happen.  Also, provably debugged code requires 
maintenance ONLY for optimization, and compiler upgrades.  Most programmers 
CANNOT write provably debugged code on large scales.  This is why some 
companies do not hire computer scientists to do their programming; 
instead, they hire mathematicians and train them.  The vastly improved 
stability of the code is critical to these companies.
     One way to look at proofs is that they are programs that CANNOT be 
executed, and that a correct proof is analogous to a program that always 
works, given correct input.
     2) Mathematical analyses can be totally contrary to conventional 
reasoning.  For instance, [this actually happened to some California 
farmers, back in the 1950's], it is possible to apply insecticide to a 
field/grove [in this case, grove], which kills the pest devasting the 
crops--and have the pest population INCREASE!  ["A mystery to science..."]  
[The pesticide also killed the unknown predator of the pest, with equal 
efficiency.]
     This is even before considering the spread of genes conferring 
resistance to the insecticide, and has NOTHING to do with natural 
selection.
     Another example of this is the classical relativistic theory of 
the electron.  According to a 1950's book which one of my professors has 
access to, the electron has to start accelerating in response to an 
electromagnetic wave BEFORE the arrival of the electromagnetic wave!  
[This is necessary to maintain sufficient smoothness in the path of the 
electron.]  This is truly bizarre, and it took me ten minutes to explain 
this to a physics graduate student.
     3) At least one author of the New Testament, when trying to 
distinguish between 'spiritual' and 'worldly' reasoning, ended up using 
the word for 'mathematical reasoning' to describe 'spiritual reasoning'.  
One of my books on spiritual warfare [49 out of 50 right-wing radical 
Christians would freak out--it's further out that way than THEY are] 
recommends studying math for those that have just been delivered from 
demonic oppression, since this is very close to spiritual thinking.  
Something like a mind-building exercise.
     4) Sufficiently accurate mathematical models can effectively coerce 
physical events, in the hard sciences and some instances in the soft 
sciences.  This is analogous to the fictional spells in many 
medievalistic-fantasy RPGs [and some others].
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/   Towards the conversion of data into information....
/
/   Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////