/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10093741
Maths isn't about discovery.

>>10093741
Infinitely many things

>>10093762
>Infinitely many things
Wrong, infinity doesn't exist.
There are an extremely large but countable number of things.

>>10093769
Faggot.

>>10093753
Wut?

>>10093769
Let f(x)=2x. The number of cartesian products contained in the function is uncountable, and each can be found.
>>10093810
Math is construction.

173

>>10093741
Until solved this
Every even integer greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two primes.

>>10093815
Maths is not the construction of a system, it is the discovery of a system by which our physical nature is governed

there's actually only 3 equations left. The media has been hiding the peak math crisis for decades now. Prepare yourself for a post-math society.

>>10093821
>>10093847
Come on guys, you know what I meant. Is there an idea of how advanced human knowledge is about mathematics in respect to the complete laws of mathematics?

Are there things mathematicians are working to solve right now?

>>10093887
It's like asking to know how much we know about the english language.

None - if we have learned anything it is that the arc of mathematics is long and it bends towards calculus.

>>10093891
We have a fair bit of knowledge on its origins, its use throughout time, and how it is evolving differently in different areas of the world, and how different societal and biological factors are driving those changes. Just because someone can't articulate and write out a response to it, doesn't mean it is a bad question.

If the size of a human is limited and the sizes of the constituent atoms constant, the number of permutations of arrangements of atoms that differ sufficiently enough to function differently and could be considered a human brain is finite. If the length of time humans exist for and number of humans are also finite, then the number of those permutations that will actually exist is even smaller.
If the brain stores knowledge, then the number of things it is possible for a human or finite group of humans to comprehend is also finite.
Regardless of the number of things that could be known, we can only hope to know a finite amount of them.

>>10093895
None? What do you mean by maths bends towards calculus

>>10093905
Good reply, but we don't know if knowledge is related to the material composition of our brains.

>>10093836
Yeah that’s gonna be a yikes from me dawg

>>10093741
process mathematics as becoming, a base setbased on division by zero and equal equivalency, ‘transcendental arithmetic’, the Occidental mathematisation of number is denounced as a repressive mega-machine of knowledge – an excrescent outgrowth of the numbering practices native to exploratory intelligence – and the great discoveries of mathematics are interpreted as misconstrued discoveries about the planomenon (or plane of consistency), as exemplified by Gödel’s ‘arithmetical counterattack against axiomatisation’.

There is practically no limit. Every time a new concept comes up you have 100 more to discover.

>>10094041
the question is... would feynmann fuck bigguy?

>>10093836
So wrong

>>10093741
Thanks to Godel's first incompleteness theorem your question is moot. For any axiomatic set strong enough to contain arthmetic on natural numbers i.e. anything useful, there will exist true but unprovable theorems.

>>10093741
About three fiddy.

>>10094041
>physishit
>know anything about math
Pick one.

>>10094041
>>10094431

>Says I'm wrong
>Provides no evidence to rebuttal my argument
>Doesn't even provide an alternative argument in the first place

Literally worthless comments.

>>10094277
Thanks for the help bro, I'll look into those topics a little bit

>>10094402
So the realm of mathematics is infinite?

>>10094041
THAT'S GONNA BE AN OMEGA YIKES FROM ME DAWG

>>10094432
Does Godel's theorem says that those unprovable theorems will remain unprovable for all of human existance? Or that we don't have the understanding yet to prove them?

>>10093741
Probably much more than the human mind is capable of

>>10095763
Maybe AI can complete the understanding of mathematics to the areas where humans are not able to reach with our current biological machines

>>10095761
It means there will always be perpetually true but unprovable theorems.

Math is about something because it's true, but we cannot prove it to be so.

>>10093815
>The number of cartesian products contained in the function is uncountable
You stop discovering at the last one you calculate.

>>10093741

What is left to be discovered? Are you kidding? We haven't discovered it yet in the first place.

What we have at the moment is a glorified bean counting system.

One that produces absurdities such as irrationals, among other things.

Now before you pay any heed to the army of blockheads who come along and slang me off, just think about it.

A fundamental unit in our current system, the number one, when expressed as a measurement at right angles to itself, produces a hypotenuse which can not be defined. It produces a number that goes on "forever"

1.41421356237....forever.

Consider, a fundamental relationship between a basic unit, in a fundamental geometry, produces a result which we can never accurately calculate.

Yet the same relationship between 5 units and 12 units yields a hypotenuse which is exactly 13

Not 13.1 or 13.25 or 13.456 or 13.98573829 etc.

But exactly 13, no more, no less.

Now, isn't that a huge red flag that there is something fundamentally hidden from our understanding?

And yet no one, not one single person either living now or in the past has been able to offer one single insight into why this extreme difference of exactitude should exist between diagonal bisection of the square of our first cardinal number and some of the variable derivatives of it thereafter.

This tells us there are conceptual insights which still lie beyond our knowledge. Until we discover those concepts then we are doing the equivalent of using Newtonian mechanics to describe the Universe. Yeah, it works, we can build bridges, even put satellites into orbit, sure. Close enough is good enough for our practical applications. But do not believe for a moment we have "discovered" mathematics. We have merely done the intellectual equivalent of banging rocks together to produce sparks.

>>10093741
Like infinity BILLION man becuase the universe is infinite and the human mind is INFINITE and therefore MATH IS INFINITE.

>>10095761
It means that it is logically impossible to prove the theorem with the axiomatic set, nothing to do with human effort.

If we know the unprovable theorem to be intuitively true then we can add it as another axiom to the set and the proof becomes trivial. But by the incompleteness theorem this new (consistent) mathematical model will still have unprovable truths. So yeah, logically we can never prove or know everything with/about mathematics. Depressing or exciting depending on your point of view.

>>10093741
Lot of interest from a non mathematician. Even if we discover everything we can start all over again with some new set of axioms.

>>10093769
>infinity doesn't exist
how tf do you explain the universe

Very nearly all of it

>>10096599
nj wildberger is that you??

>>10093836
>it is the discovery of a system by which our physical nature is governed
what does this even mean

math can be articulated as construction and discovery, all it is is layers upon layers of abstractions. Just little symbols that only have the abstract logical values that we give them. In fact anyone could theoretically invent a new math field of a new abstract object, youd just have to show that it is useful and make it consistent with thousands of other symbols in the canon

>>10096599
how is the square root of two any more absurd then 2

>>10093741
almost everything

>>10098307

Get the fuck out of here, people like you are the reason forums are garbage.

>>10098317
seriously..

God this thread is awful. Yes, there's still plenty to be discovered. No, mathematicians dont just sit with their fingers up their asses staring at empirical data all day like "physicists." Math is a serious field with serious consequences.
Many relatively unexplored areas of math exist, or areas which are expected to yield much more. Look at algebraic geometry, Langlands, nonlinear pdes, or analysis in several complex variables.
Plenty to be found, it's just all pretty complicated at this point.

>>10098317
What are you talking about? Thats a legitimate question. Its not like irrational numbers dont exist. We have discovered/constructed alot of math but irrational numbers are every bit as abstract as perfect counting numbers

>>10098317
What makes you think a stupid fucking triangle is so special?

>>10093741
There will always be more to discover. Even if you have proved all the provable truths of some axiomatic system, you can always create a new set of axioms and see what follows from them. That's how new branches of math are formed.

>>10098082
how tf do you?

Never enough, the whole point of math is that each answer leads to further questions.

>>10096599
This really is less of a problem than you make it out to be.

>>10094002
please stop posting mathnigger

>>10093905
cheeky cunt