/sci/ - Science & Math

2+2=4 is a fact. Also a theory.

Mathematics is based on axioms. Its principles are objectively true, they are facts.

>>3956599
yes 2+2=4 is true, but knowing that you have to add the numbers together is a theory. In the theory of mathematics when you are adding two numbers the sum of the numbers will be a combination of the numbers. amirite?

Most axiomizations of math define 4 to be the successor of 3 which is defined to be the successor of 2 which is defined to be the successor of 1 which is defined to be the successor of 0 which is defined to exist. From this, you can prove that 2+2 = 4.

I don't know whether this makes it a fact or not. The term seems ill-defined.

>>3956635
No. When mathematicians use the word theory they are talking about something different. A theory in science is an explanation for some set of observable facts. A theory in mathematics is a deductive system.

>>3956585
You are, in fact, a retard. Arithmetic is based upon a function that gives the successor to any given number. This is taken as an unproven axiom and the rest of algebra may be extrapolated from that. In other words, not a theory. That doesn't mean that it will always necessarily be true when applied to reality, but it is a fact within mathematics itself.

>>3956585
She is kind of right. The question is whether numbers have truth values. IF the answer is yes, then 2+2 =4 is ALSO a fact.

>>3956666
Of course shes right that 2+2=4, but isnt the process of that calculation a theory of addition?

>>3956724
Addition is not a theory. It's a necessary consequence of-- wait a second...
9/10

>>3956724
Addition is not a theory its a structure defined on a field.

>>3956937
>Its an OPERATION defined on a field

FFY.

ITT: people who don't understand the foundations of mathematics throw around words like "fact" and "theory".

Hmm. Go ahead and explain then. I am listening intently.

When I glanced at the OP pic I read it as I heart math but then I realized it says I absolutely heart math. I'm going to steal that picture.

ITT: people who think scientists and mathemeticians invented the world 'theory'.

>>3956585
>arguing with fitness teacher about math
some day you'll learn not to do that any more

>>3956585
In contemporary mathematics, this is something you prove, not something you assume is true (i.e. not an axiom). So this is not theory, but rather a fact.

A set of true statements in mathematics is called a theory. Number theory, set theory, group theory, graph theory, etc, etc have nothing unproven. They just call them theories...
2+2=4 is not an axiom so it's a theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_%28mathematical_logic%29

>>3957140
>>arguing with fitness teacher about math
>some day you'll learn not to do that any more
What's sadder is that the fitness teacher is actually right. Every statement in mathematics that considered to be true regardless if it's an axiom or theorem is contained in the set "mathematics theory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_%28mathematics%29#Mathematical_theories

The term theory is used informally within mathematics to mean a self-consistent body of definitions, axioms, theorems, examples, and so on. (Examples include group theory, Galois theory, control theory, and K-theory.) In particular there is no connotation of hypothetical. Thus the term unifying theory is more like a sociological term used to study the actions of mathematicians. It may assume nothing conjectural that would be analogous to an undiscovered scientific link. There is really no cognate within mathematics to such concepts as Proto-World in linguistics or the Gaia hypothesis.

Nonetheless there have been several episodes within the history of mathematics in which sets of individual theorems were found to be special cases of a single unifying result, or in which a single perspective about how to proceed when developing an area of mathematics could be applied fruitfully to multiple branches of the subject.

>>3956983
Depends on whether or not heart is a real number.