If one must choose between rigour and meaning, I shall unhesitatingly choose the latter.

The purely formal language of geometry describes adequately the reality of space. We might say, in this sense, that geometry is successful magic. I should like to state a converse: is not all magic, to the extent that it is successful, geometry?

All models divide naturally...into two a priori parts: one is kinematics, whose aim is to parameterize the forms of the states of the process under consideration, and the other is dynamics, describing the evolution in time of these forms.

Quantum mechanics, with its leap into statistics, has been a mere palliative for our ignorance

At a time when so many scholars in the world are calculating, is it not desirable that some, who can, dream ?

I believe that proving is not a natural activity for mathematicians.

The world of ideas is not revealed to us in one stroke; we must both permanently and unceasingly recreate it in our consciousness.