Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:36:59 UTC No. 16246445

Mathematics was discovered by humans, the fact it can apply to reality is nice.

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:42:17 UTC No. 16246448

>I drew a car
>that means cars are made out of lines of pencil lead

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:43:12 UTC No. 16246449

>/sci/ - Science and Math
>literally everything is philosophy and politics
there should be a board that discusses science and math

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:49:45 UTC No. 16246456

>>16246448
>I drew a cat
>this means that humans invented cats

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:50:58 UTC No. 16246457

>>16246456
A cat is a physical object, "mathematics" is not

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:52:07 UTC No. 16246459

>>16246457
>A cat is a physical object
why?

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:53:22 UTC No. 16246463

>>16246459
Because God made it so

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:54:02 UTC No. 16246464

>>16246459
>unironically denying cats are physical
because it interacts and is casually related to other physical objects?

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:58:14 UTC No. 16246466

>>16246464
I'm not denying that a cat is physical. I am asking how can we prove the physicality of a cat?
Perhaps mass? or volume?

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 00:03:44 UTC No. 16246475

>>16246466
By opening your eyes

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 00:09:50 UTC No. 16246486

>>16246466
Some things are self-evident.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 00:10:02 UTC No. 16246487

>>16246466
are you seriously pretending like physical objects are not well understood? Yes, if something has volume, causality, is perceptible with sense organs, etc then it is generally what philosophers and lay people call a physical object.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 05:47:59 UTC No. 16246941

>>16246459
Plato's dick was a physical object too

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:43:14 UTC No. 16247919

>>16246442
Im gonna shove my ding an sich up your poopenfarten, OP

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:44:35 UTC No. 16247921

>>16246442
reddit brain

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:49:57 UTC No. 16247930

>>16246445
It has to apply to reality, because reality is a logical system, and every logical system is a part of math

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:51:05 UTC No. 16247933

>/sci/ discovers Platonism
Cute but also cringe

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:02:58 UTC No. 16247951

>>16247930
Math is starting with some set of assumptions, and seeing whats true.
There's no reason any of the assumptions we use in math MUST exist in reality, but the fact that many do is handy.
Think about complex numbers, those weren't applicable to reality for a very long time but they can be used in quantum field equations IIRC

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:17:34 UTC No. 16247969

So what's the verdict: can we or can we not know the fundamental principles of reality by studying the shadows on the wall in Plato's Cave?

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:46:23 UTC No. 16247995

>>16247969
Do these fundamental principles exist?
If so, what makes them mathematics or not?

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:47:51 UTC No. 16247996

>>16247951
So math exists?
Interesting.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:49:52 UTC No. 16247999

>>16247996
Math is applicable. It doesn't exist in the sense that "running" exists.
You couldn't have a jar of running, you couldn't have a jar of math.
It's not a true existence, but a description.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:05:18 UTC No. 16248014

Math is a Language,
Physicist believe fairytales.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:09:05 UTC No. 16248018

>>16247999
>You couldn't have a jar of running
no? what about a wheel of running?

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:11:11 UTC No. 16248019

>>16248014
Engineers...

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:11:42 UTC No. 16248020

>>16248018
The wheel contains 0 running. You could not isolate running from the concept it is.
The wheel also contains 0 "one." There is one wheel, but there is no way to isolate the one-ness from the wheel.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:14:13 UTC No. 16248027

>>16248020
>The wheel contains 0 running.
and yet, the hamster runs.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:20:19 UTC No. 16248047

>>16248027
Can you point to the running in the hamster?
The fact you can describe a real state doesn't mean the "description is somewhere out there, bro!"

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:31:07 UTC No. 16248078

>>16247995
>Do these fundamental principles exist?
Obviously yes because regularity is one of the most fundamental characteristics of our experience.
>if so, what makes them mathematics or not?
That's the problem. Some anons argue that our perception and cognition of reality is only an image from which we can not derive knowledge about reality itself: we can draw a car, animate a car, predict where the car is going, but according to those anons that's not how reality does it.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 20:45:14 UTC No. 16248097

>>16248078
What I find most confusing is that never in the history of /sci/ or any other board there was ever an anon who grounded their ideas. Here I am: even before I label my experience there are all sorts of shapes, colors, sounds and feelings. What can I derive from this? There's duality: discernment between one thing and another thing and there's regularity / continuity.

Now how does one logically and reasonably go step by step from this basic knowledge to The Matrix?
>dude read a book there's this scientist and he did the math and he says the brain makes a picture of lightwaves and turns vibrations into sounds but only what's useful for our survival are you retarded or something?

From such stories it does not self-evidently follow that there's something beyond our perception and cognition. From a grounded perspective that idea is floating around in the air.

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:11:34 UTC No. 16248620

>>16248047
the (real) hamster runs by moving his (real) legs and thus enters the (real) state called "running"

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:14:38 UTC No. 16248622

>>16248620
Exactly my point. a defined concept rather than a concrete part of reality.

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:26:51 UTC No. 16248635

>>16248622
how do you define what is and isn't "concrete"?
what is it about a state* that makes it "non-concrete" but an object is "concrete?"
are you asserting that states aren't real? they don't exist?

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:34:52 UTC No. 16248641

>>16248635
>the (real) state of "running"
>exactly my point
You may not be very good at grasping things so let me spell it out for you
Concepts exist, and they can represent real things
But many concepts don't have any physical component to them. Concrete in this specific case means "something real you can touch and hold and modify"
Mathematics is not concrete, if you really wanted you could axiomatically define a system that has no purpose or use in our universe.

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:38:39 UTC No. 16248645

>>16248641
Okay. So there exists real mathematics? That is what you're saying? Or if not, what is the term for the real constraints to physics which mathematics comprehends?

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 02:57:41 UTC No. 16248660

>>16248645
There exists mathematics. The concept which is shared among people is real, you can share the concept.
There exists reality, which can be described by some mathematics. Reality is not made of mathematics.
You can discover mathematical truths about reality.
You can discover truths about mathematics given some certain set of axioms
And you can invent mathematics, make up new axioms and see where it takes you.
If you can apply the new math to reality, that's very handy, but not a promise or guarantee

Math is created, but math is applicable.
You discover the application of math you create.

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 03:07:35 UTC No. 16248672

>>16246442
Mathematics is the smallest subtotal on the intellectual price tag of redditheism though

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 03:18:29 UTC No. 16248686

>>16246445

math was created by humans to describe things we perceive

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 03:23:41 UTC No. 16248689

>>16248686
Thus the standard set of axioms used in mathematics.

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 03:36:58 UTC No. 16248702

>>16248689
You mean probability theory there is no need for axioms when mesuring speed or some material substance. You just need axioms when trying to compute probability. Which is nearly impossible to do 100%

Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 06:30:26 UTC No. 16248853

>>16246449
the average user of this site is too retarded for science and math