1 + 1 = 3: Synergy Arithmetic in Economics
- 1 UCLA Department of Mathematics, Marina Del Rey, USA
- 2 University of Hawaii, Honolulu, USA
Abstract
Counting has always been one of the most important operations for human be-ings. Naturally, it is inherent in economics and business. We count with the unique arithmetic, which humans have used for millennia. However, over time, the most inquisitive thinkers have questioned the validity of standard arithmetic in certain settings. It started in ancient Greece with the famous philosopher Zeno of Elea, who elaborated a number of paradoxes questioning popular knowledge. Millennia later, the famous German researcher Herman Helmholtz (1821-1894) [1] expressed reservations about applicability of conventional arithmetic with respect to physical phenomena. In the 20 th and 21 st century, mathematicians such as Yesenin-Volpin (1960) [2], Van Bendegem (1994) [3], Rosinger (2008) [4] and others articulated similar concerns. In validation, in the 20th century expressions such as 1 + 1 = 3 or 1 + 1 = 1 occurred to reflect important characteristics of economic, business, and social processes. We call these expressions synergy arithmetic. It is common notion that synergy arithmetic has no meaning mathematically. However in this paper we mathematically ground and explicate synergy arithmetic.
- Helmholtz, H. (1887) Zahlen und Messen in Philosophische Aufsatze. Fues’s Verlag, Leipzig, 17-52. (Translated by Bryan, C.L. (1930) Counting and Measuring. Van Nostrand)
- Yesenin-Volpin, А.С. (1960) On the Grounding of Set Theory. In: Application of Logic in Science and Technology, Мoscow, 22-118. (In Russian)
- Van Bendegem, J.P. (1994/1996) Strict Finitism as a Viable Alternative in the Foundations of Mathematics. Logique et Analyse, 37, 23-40.
- Rosinger, E.E. (2008) On the Safe Use of Inconsistent Mathematics. arXiv.org, math.GM, 0811.2405v2.
- Kline, M. (1980) Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty. Oxford University Press, New York.
- Mattessich, R. (1998) From Accounting to Negative Numbers: A Signal Contribution of Medieval India to Mathematics. Accounting Historians Journal, 25, 129-145.
- Martinez, A.A. (2006) Negative Math: How Mathematical Rules Can Be Positively Bent. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
- von Neumann, J. (1955) Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
- Blehman, I.I., Myshkis, A.D. and Panovko, Ya.G. (1983) Mechanics and Applied Logic. Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian)
- Kolmogorov, A.N. (1961) Automata and Life in Knowledge Is Power, No. 10, No. 11.
- Littlewood, J.E. (1953) Miscellany. Methuen, London.
- Burgin, M.S. (1977) Non-Classical Models of Natural Numbers. Russian Mathematical Surveys, 32, 209-210.
- Czachor, M. (2016) Information Processing and Fechner’s Problem as a Choice of Arithmetic. arXiv:1602.00587
- Dummett, M. (1975) Wang’s Paradox. Synthese, 30, 301-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00485048
- Knuth, D.E. (1976) Mathematics and Computer Science: Coping with Finiteness. Science, 194, 1235-1242. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.194.4271.1235
- Burgin, M. (1997) Non-Diophantine Arithmetics. Ukrainian Academy of Information Sciences, Kiev. (In Russian)
- Burgin, M. (2007) Elements of Non-Diophantine Arithmetics. 6th Annual International Conference on Statistics, Mathematics and Related Fields, Honolulu, 17-19 January 2007, 190-203.
- Burgin, M. (2010) Introduction to Projective Arithmetics, Preprint in Mathematics. Math.GM/1010.3287, 21 p. http://arXiv.org