Page 2 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Nov 2012, 9:05 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:
Those who can read the language that nature is constructed in(numbers) are the interpreters of nature(mathematicians, physicists), but they don't have all the say in what it all means in the final analysis.


That is a very Pythagorean view.

ruveyn



Jitro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 589

09 Nov 2012, 2:59 pm

Math is very real. The symbols we use for it and base ten, however, are human inventions.



blackelk
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: New York

09 Nov 2012, 3:12 pm

Math is about finding patterns in the universe. Could the universe or we exist without these patterns? No.

There is still debate between mathematicians and physicists if math is invented or discovered. I mean, would every intelligent race eventually form mathematics when investigating the universe? Would advanced aliens have math, for example? I think it's safe to assume they would. It's similar to the question, does the universe really have an order, or do humans order it?

There was a good essay on this subject by Wigner called the Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics.

As Wigner concluded:

Quote:
The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve.


And Einstein put it this way:

Quote:
You find it strange that I consider the comprehensibility of the world (to the extent that we are authorized to speak of such a comprehensibility) as a miracle or as an eternal mystery. Well, a priori one should expect a chaotic world which cannot be grasped by the mind in any way. One could (yes one should) expect the world to be subjected to law only to the extent that we order it through our intelligence. Ordering of this kind would be like the alphabetical ordering of the words of a language. By contrast, the kind of order created by Newton’s theory of gravitation, for instance, is wholly different. Even if the axioms of the theory are proposed by man, the success of such a project presupposes a high degree of ordering of the objective world, and this could not be expected a priori. That is the “miracle” which is being constantly reinforced as our knowledge expands.


Or has he put more simply: "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."


_________________
"Meaninglessness inhibits fullness of life and is therefore equivalent to illness. Meaning makes a great many things endurable ? perhaps everything.?


slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 112
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: Dystopia Planetia

09 Nov 2012, 4:25 pm

In my view, Mathematics is by far the most valuable language our species has ever developed.

I think schools should have Math(s) immersion programs instead of or in addition to other language immersion programs. :D :D



MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

09 Nov 2012, 5:10 pm

blackelk wrote:
Math is about finding patterns in the universe. Could the universe or we exist without these patterns? No.

There is still debate between mathematicians and physicists if math is invented or discovered. I mean, would every intelligent race eventually form mathematics when investigating the universe? Would advanced aliens have math, for example? I think it's safe to assume they would. It's similar to the question, does the universe really have an order, or do humans order it?

There was a good essay on this subject by Wigner called the Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics.

As Wigner concluded:

Quote:
The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve.


And Einstein put it this way:

Quote:
You find it strange that I consider the comprehensibility of the world (to the extent that we are authorized to speak of such a comprehensibility) as a miracle or as an eternal mystery. Well, a priori one should expect a chaotic world which cannot be grasped by the mind in any way. One could (yes one should) expect the world to be subjected to law only to the extent that we order it through our intelligence. Ordering of this kind would be like the alphabetical ordering of the words of a language. By contrast, the kind of order created by Newton’s theory of gravitation, for instance, is wholly different. Even if the axioms of the theory are proposed by man, the success of such a project presupposes a high degree of ordering of the objective world, and this could not be expected a priori. That is the “miracle” which is being constantly reinforced as our knowledge expands.


Or has he put more simply: "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."


We order it to the extent that we could perceive its order, but even 300 years after Newton gave us his gift, our understanding of it is still beyond primitive. What and which tip of the iceberg did he really give us? Why don't we have a generic universe? Or... Why don't we have a chaotic universe that is constantly breaking its own laws into inexistence? Why is it so predictable? And why are we able to perceive it at all? Especially in a meaningful way....

Aliens, I would imagine, would only be advanced, or more so then us, if they had a better understanding of mechanics of nature, or that is already built into their genetics and their biology already presupposes and perceives a wider range of the natural world then us.


_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

09 Nov 2012, 5:19 pm

It's the opposite, math depends upon existence, it's a system created by human beings to describe and offer proof of existence. Of course, it would highly depend upon whether or not you are referring to "math" as in the system humans created, or math in terms of the systems that conform to mathematical rules. However, in both cases the causality appears clear to me. It becomes an actually difficult chicken and egg question.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Nov 2012, 9:02 pm

TM wrote:
It's the opposite, math depends upon existence, it's a system created by human beings to describe and offer proof of existence. Of course, it would highly depend upon whether or not you are referring to "math" as in the system humans created, or math in terms of the systems that conform to mathematical rules. However, in both cases the causality appears clear to me. It becomes an actually difficult chicken and egg question.


I think you might enjoy this essay:

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDram ... igner.html

ruveyn