Back in the 1960s, kids used to watch the TV series Lost in Space. Starring on this
show was a robot which, when asked a stupid or answerless question replied, "It does not
compute!" More seriously, we now ask, "Does Nature compute?"

Science believes very deeply that mathematics reflects the real world, that we live in an ordered
universe where everything can be reduced to mathematical expressions. The progress of science,
particularly physics, seems to bear out this symbiotic relationship between mathematics and the
physical world.

However, P. Davies points out that that there are uncomputable numbers and
operations. In fact, there are infinitudes of them. All the world's computers could chug away
forever and not come up with answers in these cases. So far, Nature has been kind, or
we have been lucky, because we have been able to nicely mirror Nature with "doable"
math. Davies wonders if it has been entirely a matter of luck:

"Einstein said that God is subtle but not malicious, and we must hope
that the laws of physics will turn out to be computable after all. If so, that fact alone would
provoke all sorts of interesting scientific and philosophical questions. Just why is the world
structured in such a way that we can describe its basic principles using 'do-able' mathematics?
How was this mathematical ability evolved in humans?"

Are our minds and, therefore, our computers so structured that we can understand (compute) only
a limited portion of Nature? Have other entities evolved in ways such that what we know of
Nature is uncomputable to them?

(Davies, Paul; "Is Nature Mathematical?" New Scientist, p. 25, March 21,
1992.)