/sci/ - Science & Math

mathematics is applies universe

Mathematics is applied logic.

Philosopher and Mathematician Bertrand Russel suggested that Mathematics is applied logic, however aparently there were several flaws in his attempt to base mathematics on logic. Some aspects of mathematics are however definitley applied logic.

Also: Physics is not just applied mathematics. Physicists apply mathematics. However physics is an empirical science, and as such needs more than just mathematics, which is a priori.

anyone have that picture that has all the "*** is just applied ***" ?

mathematics is boring people applied

>>1167846

Here ya go: http://xkcd.com/435/

>>1167842
troll threads are no place for reason

Mathematics is as pure as it gets.

and logic is applied philosophy. which is why all science is considered PHILOSOPHICAL.

>>1167857

Thanks !

>>1167846
it's from a webcomic called xkcd, search for it at
www.xkcd.com

>>1167868
No, philosophy is misapplied logic.

>>1167868

Yea, well all sciences are specialized in some way, so just saying this is applied that, is kinda.. well, idiotic.

>>1167868
Actually logic was invented by philosophers as a tool to apply to philosophical arguments.

>>1167890

you just went full retard

>>1167895
Logic is the steps to a dance you can perform with axioms to ensure you never produce a false conclusion from true premises. It applies just as well to mathematics as it does to troll threads

Maths cant be applied logic, because logic is based on mathematics...

>>1167924
Other way around. Math is set theory and logic.

>>1167826
Mathematics is applied philosophy.

>>1167940

so, 1 + 1 is philosophy?

>>1167976
yes.

>>1167980

but philosophy is theoretical. 1 + 1 is fact?

>>1167986

Philosophy is no more theoretical than 1+1

www.anomtalk.se but with n instead of m near the middle ff4acc2c02eec023450299a6e35d8b03 75713

>>1168011

but 1 + 1 is tested reality. Philosophy is conjecture.

>>1167986
>1 + 1 is fact?
It's not a fact. Numbers don't exist, they're intangible, an idea. It's philosophy.

>>1168011
1+1 is not a proposition, so it is no more a fact than "Bird". "1+1=2" is a proposition, which happens to be a fact

Also, its worth pointing out philosophy is a very, very broad field. Some of it is theoretical, some of it very practical

But if math is philosophical, why would .999 = 1?

>>1168029
Why wouldn't .999~=1 if it wasn't philosophical?

>>1167986

stop using words you don't understand

>>1168029
.999 =/= 1
.999 = .999
.999... = 1

they're almost the same
both start with assumptions/theory
then apply logic

in physics the logic is used to describe the universe
in mathematic the logic is used to derive theorems which help solving complex problems they're just tools
mathematics is used in physics to describe the universe more accurately, for example:
about gravity newton can say that bodies attract but with mathematics he can calculate how much they attract

From my understanding physics cannot be made to suit your desires, rather it is you understanding how the mechanics of the universe works.

Mathematical principles are not pure as people think, numbers can be manipulated to suit your needs. This have been proven by mathematicians time and again.

So physics is real events that cannot be changed under any circumstance.

Logic is a progressive thought of reason in physics i.e if i drop 100lbs of feathers and 100lbs of lead which will drop faster? we hopefully all know the answer to this. it's applied logic and not negotiable.

however in maths you can negotiate for whatever you want. I don't have a trillion dollars but i can suggest i do and i can suggest you owe me a trillion dollars and i have a gun so my maths i means you owe me a trillion dollars.

unlike pysics which is based on I have 100 tons of gold, you have 50 tons of gold. if you give me 25 tons of gold I can coat the super hadron collider circuits to conduct electricity with little no no ware on the systems parts meaning a longer life span for the large hadron collider.

my philosophy is that you are too stupid to understand anything and that you hold the world back by suggesting an invisible number exists and that you cannot prove which make me want to scream and punch you in the face for being a retarded troll now please get out of my face before i destroy you with my very real and not theoretical laser beam that i will not theoretically burn you to a liquid pulp of chemical bonds which i will feed to my dog.

and you owe me 10 bux as well

>>1168087

Wait. Are we dropping the 100lbs of feathers and lead in a vacuum? Are they in square boxes, spherical containers?

>>1168106
it depends on the purity of the gold

good god, fuck randall and his xkcd unfunny bs. physic sis not applied mathematics AT ALL. explain to me why there is a physics and applied physics major, along with applied math.

>>1168019
2=2 is not real
it's an assumption
the universe doesn't care if 2 does not always equal 2
it's only you who has taken it for granted

>>1168087
you better be trolling

else you better learn your math....

>>1168087

6/10

Started out well but went a bit over the top towards the end.

>>1168131
it started like a retard and ended like a retard...

>>1168115
Since when does 'not real' = 'an assumption'?

Non-realist theories of physics hold that electrons are just an assumption, but no less real for that

There are several non-real things I don't assume - "Unicorns are white" for example, is a fact with two equally false propositions as a spinoff

Basically, the interface between philosopical logic, mathematics and empirical science is a lot more complicated that anyone on this board seems to give credit

>>1168138
you don't seem to understand what i've had in mind
but it doesn't matter please explain:
>Basically, the interface between philosopical logic, mathematics and empirical science is a lot more complicated that anyone on this board seems to give credit

why do you think they're so much different?

>>1168114
>>1168106


I am glad that there are still logical thinkers out there to tackle these problems.

but the feather and the hammer on the moon experiment is not the same as 100 lbs of feathers vs 100lbs of lead, besides there's>>1168115
so many possible variable to calculate with this we could have fun for a long time just trying out all the possibility/
>>1168114

true but the universe does care about things that work and things that don't.

now there is 1 earth and 1 moon that is tow bodys (lets forget all the other junk like satellite station and fairly large meteor fragments that float around our humble planet)

that is 2 not 1.5 of earth just 1 earth 1 moon. not 1.89686985 of moon or 0.000678 of earth just 1 1 because its a calculable number you can comprehend.

and i have said this before the most as far as i know a human can group numbers too is 9 i think gary Kasparoph could group 15 individual numbers of object in his mind which made him the best chess player in the world for a time. anything bigger than 5 for most humans is simply an incomprehensible clump of things stuff. nothing more.

you cannnot comrehend 1129872139817249813742340754 tacos it just looks like a mountain of tacos.and thats 1 mountain of tacos

but imagine if you had 3 moutians of made up of 1294361239462, 943658973642, 91234659872346

then what?

To be fair to XKCD, that comic never even suggests that physics is applied math.

The "y is just applied x" begins with physics. The fields are separated by purity, not application.

>>1168138


no i dont think so it just more complicated than a 35 minute diiscussion can handle.

these kinds of debates span decades and people still dont agree. we are not going to come to an astonishing realisation. mainly because people are too stubborn to accept others knowledge bases.

I don't know who told you an electron is a theory, but its not, it's not an assumption either. its a fact or else we would not be speaking at all ( internets)

wheras i can totally manipulate numbers to prove whatever i want.

>>1168161
That is a statement about people, not numbers

>>1168194
Uh... you do know that non-realist theories are the most common in scientific philosophy at the moment? Basically saying that it is wrong to talk about an electron as being 'real' because you can only observe it through its interactions? Its an important distinction to make as progress is made with WIMPs and other dimensions, since it means we can consistently talk about things we can only prove exist mathematically without having to postulate all kinds of nonsense.

I bring this up by way of clarifying argument; philosophy is important to natural sciences whatever (incorrect) ideas you might have that the rules of logic are open to your manipulation.

>>1167826

>if Physics is just applied Mathematics, what is Mathematics applied?

It isn't there's two ways to explain something and only one of them is quantitative.

>>1167828
This

>>1168260


no. maths has proven itself to be irrational many time.

irrationality is not logic.

but i think the crux of this debate is that people seem to be arguing over what is logic.

so i turn people attention to logic gates in science which is what is actually applied logic not a theoretical number of maths. whic is based on the universal logic and fails regularly.

unless we are talking about probability factors. even then its a guess.>>1168238

but nobody has managed to manipulate the laws of physics. no that's wrong, they have but on such a small scale it doesn't really do anything except prove that it is possible.

But at this stage i have to bow out. because for me when things break down to quantum string theory and multi verses it is simply too much for my primitive monkey brain to comprehend.

I suppose it comes down to the fact the maths is used to calculate interest rates, debt and inflation which to me is bullshit.

If i have 0 pounds in my bank how can they take what is not there, but they do regularly and people wonder why the world is in an economic crisis.

not just that but it creates more problems than it solves.

maths for me is a good way to determine distance, speed and time. using those things being able to track bodys of things from cars to sound to light.

but an imaginary trillion dollar debt made up by a few people in a room making the world worse off is not a thing to brag about and certainly not at all logical in anyway.

cause and effect is logical. if i stab you will you die? yes. but if i rob you and you have no money can i pretend you do and take invisible money from you which you can repay with interest of a period of a certain amount of years which i will augment to my own satisfaction in my ability to manipulate numbers.

thats the point where maths loses my respect.

>>1168340
>>1168340
3/10

>>1168355


im sorry you are coring my post based on what?

>what is Mathematics applied?
applied reason
"Mathematics is the great unifier."
pic related

>>1168381

on how idiotic it is

>>1168417
that...made no sense.

professor Julius sumner miller, you've done it again.

>>1168417
hahaha

>but nobody has managed to manipulate the laws of physics. no that's wrong, they have but on such a small scale it doesn't really do anything except prove that it is possible.

myfacewhenrealisingthathesserious.jpg

>>1167828

Logic is applied faggotry.

- Working class shmoe.

>>1168564

>professor Julius sumner miller

is fucking epic. youtube that shit.

>>1168021
You are clearly confusing pholosophy with psychology.

Philosophy is "the thing that becomes before science". When a civilisation get serious, science is born and philosophy is slowly put aside.

And mathematics is clearly not only logic. You can do all the logic you want. Without proper definitions, you will get nothing.

as far as i can tell 1+1=2 is the representation of having one object and then adding another identical object, which gives you double the amount of objects. This is not really a proposition. And it cannot be untrue under any circumstances, by definition.

>>1168748
1. Work on base 2
2. do 1+1
3. shit bricks
4. ?????
5. PROFIT!

>>1168758
zzzzzz....

>>1168748
Don't think of it like 1+1=2. Think of it as 1+1=1'.

1+1=2 only if you are using a number that uses the idea of two as a representation. if you used binary it would be 1+1= 11.

1+1 really equals 1+1, 2 is what we choose to represent the outcome.
facts are just events perceived by an observer and when you rely on the perception of an observer nothing can really be fact. the map is not the territory.

>>1169038

>binary
>1+1 =11

Wow you are retarded.

>>1169038
You have to be shitting me.

"There are 10 types of people, people who understand binary and those who don't."

it's true in base 1