/sci/ - Science & Math

>laws of logic exist independently

if so, where would they be stored?

>>5874739

in the compartment beside the physical laws

People have been asking and thinking about this for 1000s of years, and you think 4chan is gonna solve it for you?

In my opinion, it's a byproduct of actions at the quantum level.

>>5874727
>Do the laws of logic exist independently of human or animal consciousness?

why and how can this happen

>>5874727
>Do the laws of logic exist independently of human or animal consciousness?

no

>>5874727
Your a,b,c bullshit is not always true. It is called the transitive propety, and it not nesscarly true for all systems in math/logic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitive_relation

It is no where near anything fundemental or law like, and a shit ton of system don't obey it.

For instance, the nontransitive dice!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontransitive_dice

>>5874868
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontransitive_game

>>5874868

can you give a instance where DeMorgan's laws don't hold?

>>5874873
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock,_Paper,_Scissors

Mathematical and logical laws are just man made approximate descriptions of how causality affects things. They approximately describe.

As such, no. If there is no one to observe there is no one to notice that two hydrogen atoms usually form a hydrogen molecule. That doesn't mean it wouldn't happen, though.

Causality does. Descriptions do not.

>>5874916

are the laws inherent in the particles or in space?

>>5874920
What do you mean?

Oh. I can't say, but as all matter is supposedly from higgs etc I think field theories are the better choice. For now.

>>5874874
>when don't De Morgans Laws hold

1) Sytems arising from propositional logic in which a logical operator does not have a dual.

2) Systems where propositional logic is not valid

You need to remember that all things in math/logic are either derived from shit that is assume true, or assume true to begin with.

If you assume propositional logic to begin with, and your operators have duals, then you can derive the De Morgans Laws. That is where they come from.

>>5874979
You really have no idea what you are talking about.

My thoughts are electric waves firing through neurons. What gives rise to my thoughts is the interaction of electricity with matter. It's possible that somewhere, out there, nature has by random chance assembled the same amount of electricity firing through the correct alignment of particles.

>>5874995
Suuure.

Whatever floats your boat

>>5874873

a=those tits, b=my dick, c=erection

a=b, b=c, a=c

>>5875018
How old are you?

>>5875103
Those are not equal.

>>5874873
I wish I knew more about game theory.

>>5874739
in the matrix

>>5877573
Why not? She defined them that way.

>>5880647
In that case her definitions are inconsistent and not compatible with the common consensus.

I don't know much about these topics, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Let's take the Pythagorean theorem for example. One leg of a right triangle squared plus the other leg squared equals the hypotenuse squared. If this was never discovered, or written down, it is arguable that this would never have been a part of "human consciousness".

However, does that mean that the universe would act any differently in that regard?

If we didn't know about the Pythagorean theorem, ladders would still balance against walls the same way if we did.

That example why I think they exist independently. I'm interested in this topic, so if anyone wants to correct/further inform me, I would be delighted.

Reminder that unless more people tell moot (moot@4chan.org) and the mods (irc.rizon.net, #4chan) what they think about it, this spambumping will never end:

>>5876146
>>5877573
>>5878820
>>5879961
>>5880647
>>5882056

>>5882360
I dunno man, there has always been a lot of spam on these threads

>>5882360
what is that pic?

Well you have to realize that logic and physical laws are not rules we made up but rather our crude attempt at explaining and codifying the properties of the universe. So when you say a=b, and b=c, then a=c that not because some philosopher or mathematician said so it just happens to be the way the universe works.

the laws of logic exist because we have human conscious OP and we have human conscious and exist as humans because their is a universal construct OP ( you see how it all connects together ) the reason we can conceive and rationalize these purely logical concepts is because first of all we are logical at the very core of our existence ( its the way the universe is wired ) Logic is objective truth because at its very basis it cannot be changed OP and that's what makes it truth ( due to the fact that it can't be altered ) there's something bigger out their OP and we are part of it, the universe is constantly expanding and because it's constantly expanding this signifies something higher and bigger working behind the things in the universe ( earth, people, human relations, ect )

>>5882360
interesting

>>5882583
>because
Stopped reading there. "because" is a logical operator. Please derive or proof logic without using logic. Circular arguments have no place on /sci/.

That's a really good question and I remember being fascinated when reading kant's metaphysics of morals. He pretty much argues that morality (in a sense logic) is not 'good' for some arbitrary, man made/imposed reason but rather because its the logical route of action.

I'm not going to ruin the philosophy behind it by giving you a half-assed summary that I've forgotten half of anyway, but give it a read. Really interesting arguments and entry into forming some semblance of an answer for you question.

>>5882678

I just want to add that having a discussion about this topic is fine and all, but like I said it really cant compare to reading texts that are written by brilliant men on this topic. If you really want an answer pick up a book rather than gauging users that spend their time on 4chan.

>>5882634
>"because" is a logical operator

No, it isn't. Logical implication and causlity are not the same thing.

>>5882583
>we have human conscious
What is that? How do you know this?

>>5882581
Are you saying that mathematics is discovered and not invented?

>>5886218
old troll... existing since Ancient Greek Times, (and even before).

Have you ever thought that some questions just don't have answer (Kant pointed it out, as mentionned before) ?
Or that they don't actually recover or mean anything ?

I'm sure u know H2G, written by D. Adams :
-What is the answer to life, the universe, and everything ?
- 42
- waaaat ? Are u fucking kidding ourselves ?
- No. That's the answer. The problem is that you don't really understand the question

--> I like this part :)

>>5886271
>Have you ever thought that some questions just don't have answer (Kant pointed it out, as mentionned before) ?
Every question has an answer.

>>5887343
>Every question has an answer.

Not sure is retarded or troll?

>>5886271
>Have you ever thought that some questions just don't have answer

Can you give an example?

Someone has been keeping at least 35 threads alive
by bumping them twice a day. Compare the post times of
>>5876146 >>5877573 >>5878820 >>5879961 >>5880647 >>5882056
>>5884097 >>5884857 >>5886218 >>5887343 >>5888741
to the post times in other threads.
It's clear most of these are the same person.
The threads being bumped:
>>5858447 >>5861383 >>5862983 >>5863249 >>5865823 >>5866853
>>5867452 >>5867640 >>5868097 >>5868460 >>5868538 >>5869504
>>5869595 >>5869759 >>5869946 >>5872951 >>5873166 >>5873829
>>5874378 >>5874727 >>5875025 >>5876410 >>5876819 >>5878449
>>5878607 >>5878684 >>5878722 >>5880041 >>5880453 >>5880775
>>5881738 >>5883998 >>5884116 >>5884625 >>5885545
Write to moot@4chan.org if you want it to stop.

>>5888741
If you are into logical/mathematical stuff :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problem

If you're more into philosphy, read as an introduction (first guy who pointed out, for all I know) "Kritik der reinen Vernunft" (Kant)
-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason#The_Antinomy_of_Pure_Reason

Pay attention to the "spirit" of the ideas (because old text, so some of exemples are outdated)

If u want a basic example : how can u decide (i mean prove) that you are awake and not dreaming ? (like the matrix thing and blablabla)

What would we do with definitve answers to existential questions ? We'll be like... pshuttt

>>5874727

"Does hunger exist in a universe without stomachs?"

Ugh.

>>5889341
>what difference does it make? This board is slow, full of itself, and autistic

>>5889377
Why are you here then?

>>5889386
proof of autism right here

>>5889392
The only reason I can see for being here if you think that about the board is to shitpost and troll. Is that why you're here?