Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Matheology § 300
Replies: 63   Last Post: Jul 18, 2013 2:23 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
albrecht

Posts: 1,136
Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Matheology § 300
Posted: Jul 16, 2013 6:39 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Am Dienstag, 16. Juli 2013 08:46:16 UTC+2 schrieb Virgil:
> > On Monday, July 15, 2013 8:58:19 AM UTC+2, Virgil wrote:
>
> > > Am Montag, 15. Juli 2013 07:51:47 UTC+2 schrieb Albrecht:
>
>
>

> > > > > Modern math ist the only "science"
>
> > > Math is not a science at all.
>
> > > Nothing is proved or disproved in mathematics by looking at physical
>
> > > evidence.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You apply the Anglo-Saxon sight of this things and take it as overall truth.
>
> > Suitable for your daily demonstrated arrogance.
>
> >
>
> > Other nations take math as science and with good arguments: there are some
>
> > basic principles about the working within the subjects. These principles are
>
> > e.g. accuratness, apply of logic, confirmability, etc.
>
>
>
> Applied mathematics may take into account ow well the mathematics
>
> conforms to the physical world, but pure mathematics does not.
>
>
>
> All proofs of all mathematical theorems are based purely on their
>
> conforming to purely mathematical assumptions like axiom systems.
>
>
>
> The ultimate proof of Fermat's last theorem, for example, does not rely
>
> on any sort of physical evidence or conformity with the physical world
>
> whatsoever.
>

> >
>
> > And you are a second time wrong: Parts of math are proveable by physical
>
> > evidence.
>
>
>
> I know of no theorem of pure mathematics whose proof relies in any way
>
> on physical evidence.
>
>
>
> If you think otherwise, perhaps you can cite some examples of
>
> mathematical theorems whose proofs rely on physical evidence in support
>
> of that claim.
>
>
>
>
>

> > Math is developed that way over tens of thousands of years. Sadly,
>
> > todays students are not aware oft this facts.
>
>
>
> The earliest evidences of what we would now call mathematics is no more
>
> than about 5000 to 6000 years old, from ancient Egypt, and is certainly
>
> not several tens of millennia as yo cliam.
>

> >
>
> > And, yes, Einstein. Math is pure, that means, 1+1=2, and not a little bit
>
> > more than 2 or less than 2. That's the great difference between math and
>
> > natural science. So what?
>
> >
>
> > Don't forget: Einstein had poked his tongue out at you. Think about it.
>
>
>
> Einstein agrees with me that pure math has nothing to do with the
>
> physical world:
>
>
>
> "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to
>
> reality, they are not certain; and as
>
> far as they are certain, they do not refer
>
> to reality. It seems to me that complete
>
> clearness as to this state of things first
>
> became common property through that new departure
>
> in mathematics which is known by the name of
>
> mathematical logic or ?Axiomatics.? The progress
>
> achieved by axiomatics consists in its having
>
> neatly separated the logical-formal from its
>
> objective or intuitive content; according to
>
> axiomatics the logical-formal alone forms the
>
> subject-matter of mathematics, which is not
>
> concerned with the intuitive or other content
>
> associated with the logical-formal. . . .
>
> [On this view it is clear that] mathematics
>
> as such cannot predicate anything about
>
> perceptual objects or real objects. In
>
> axiomatic geometry the words ?point,? ?straight
>
> line,? etc., stand only for empty
>
> conceptual schemata."
>
>
>
> Albert Einstein
>
> --


Clearly you are unable to learn something new. In spite of that I tell you: Since mankind counts, mankind does math. Thus since more than tens of thousands of years.
And I am able to prove 1+1=2 by physical evidence. Perhaps you are not.


Date Subject Author
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
Tucsondrew@me.com
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
Tucsondrew@me.com
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
albrecht
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
albrecht
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Ralf Bader
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology �Organization: Anon
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology �Organization: Anon
Tanu R.
7/18/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
albrecht
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/17/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/16/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
fom
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
fom
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology § 300
LudovicoVan
7/13/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/14/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil
7/14/13
Read Re: WMytheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: WMytheology � 300
Virgil
7/15/13
Read Re: Matheology � 300
Virgil

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.