I think all math does is shed light on what is often hidden by the sheer complexity of the [inter]relations and the (in|de)duction needed to find them. Then, coded, the computer does most of the heavy lifting.Seems we try to do intuitiely , when math challenged , what should be done mathematically...
I agree though, I have never seen anything like human intuition. Let me give you an example. Someone recently asked me how I came up with my model. I tell you, all I did was intuit my way to it, and it came almost naturally to me. Granted, I have been doing this for a very long time, so it is not like I just drank some OJ and poof out the top of my head it came. I estimate that it would take a computer probably something like 500 trillion simulations to find it. And then, it might not understand how to trade it.
What is strange is, I don't even know why I was drawn to this model. It is as if it found me instead of me finding it. I tell you it is very strange. No question in my mind, the brain is not running some serial algorithm called creativity. Intuition and creativity are somehow exploring truly colossal search spaces way beyond even the most powerful computers, all almost effortlessly. Still, I wonder how Watson would do.
To me, human intuition is close to being voodoo and is the one thing that makes me a closet mystic.
Last edited: