|
|
Re: Why Math Works: Is math invented or discovered?
Posted:
Jul 23, 2011 3:12 PM
|
|
"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:3f8d3346-9139-4557-956b-f057f9a59edc@n35g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 22, 11:33 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why Math Works: Is math invented or discovered?
> By Mario
> Liviohttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-math-works
>
> "Part of the puzzle is the question of whether mathematics is an
> invention (a creation of the human mind) or a discovery (something that
> exists independently of us). The author suggests it is both.
> See:http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-math-works
Lessee. Scientific American + "Theoretical Astrophysicist" + "Wormley
post" = total waste of digital bandwidth.
Is math "invented" or "discovered"?
==================================================
Was painting invented or discovered?
Think of the colours of flowers and berries on a green bush under a
blue sky and model it on a cave wall by torchlight.
Was music invented or discovered?
Think of the birds singing and the brook babbling to the beat of your
own heart or the thunder of hooves and model it with fife and drum.
Math is art, along with music and painting. It can be good or bad, and
is used to imitate, to model the world as we know it.
"God made the natural numbers, all else is the work of Man" - Anon.
To quote Sci Am.: "Most people never think twice about the fact that
scientists use mathematics to describe and explain the world."
Explain? What exactly does that mean? What COULD it mean? Think about
it. Describe makes sense. "Explain" does not.
Math "discovered"? I wonder what it feels like to pretend to
understand science but really spend your life with your head up your
ass? Math is NOT "discovered". Utter nonsense! Shall we consult math
to "discover" if parallel lines ever meet or not? Excuse me. You
CAN'T. Because BOTH systems are valid mathematics. The ONLY
requirement is that the systems be self-consistent. They DO NOT have
any requirement to conform to reality. That SOME mathematical systems
have a CERTAIN DEGREE of conformity to reality is just a happy
coincidence but hardly a "discovery".
This is exactly the problem with science and "scientists" today. They
all compete to see who is "smarter" by trying to "snow" each other by
seeing who has the most "advanced" (meaning esoteric and
incomprehensible) mathematical abilities. Oh, he's REALLY smart,
because he used the most advanced math and I didn't understand a word!
Feh! That's really disgusting to any "real" scientist.
We "Discover" how the universe works, but we "create" abstract
mathematical systems. Doesn't the word "abstract" give anyone a clue
here? So here's another theoretical frustrated mathematician trying to
prove that mathematics is "discovery". Sure you can start with a set
of mathematical axioms and then "discover" all the mathematical "laws"
and "rules" that follow in that particular system, but you've learned
nothing about the universe. Obviously the author has never even SEEN a
real antenna let alone calculated one. If Maxwell's equations are so
freakin' perfect, then please explain why engineers have to summarily
throw out "non-physical results"? The answer is simple:
MATHEMATICS IS NOT MORE REAL THAN REALITY!
MATHEMATICS IS CREATED.
REALITY IS DISCOVERED.
Sheesh. Our "official" spokesmen are idiots!
|
|
