/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 446 KB, 711x717, 49405393-05c3-4c5c-a664-a7ee92ebb.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue May 20 14:32:45 2014 No.6544665 [Reply] [Original]

>Mathematics > Physics

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 14:35:17 2014 No.6544669 >>6544665 but who are you quoting?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 14:35:19 2014 No.6544670 >>6544665 bullshit, constanze is in no way better than math.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 14:46:15 2014 No.6544697 >>6544665 I'm a physicist, but I recognize that the study of physics has largely benefited from contributions from mathematicians. Physicists and mathematicians should not be arguing.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 23:28:29 2014 No.6545609 >both

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 23:29:20 2014 No.6545613 >>6544665 >Physics > Mathematics > Women Studies

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 23:33:54 2014 No.6545620 >>6544670 Well, I got it.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 20 23:35:07 2014 No.6545623 >>6545613 >Women Studies >Women's Studies

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 05:13:12 2014 No.6546126 applied math > physics > biology > psychology > philosophy > pure math

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 05:14:23 2014 No.6546129 >>6545623 >women's studies you mean home economics?

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:08:39 2014 No.6546167 >>6544665 Linguistics>Mathematics>Physics. Yeah.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:22:28 2014 No.6546173 >>6545623 I'd like to study a broad... or two, if you know what I mean.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:23:42 2014 No.6546175 >>6546173 >a broad

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:35:11 2014 No.6546182 File: 292 KB, 422x499, CIAgrinning.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >randall shits arguing which science is better >people responding seriously to these subjective statement

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:37:25 2014 No.6546184 >>6546182 >I don't know what subjective means

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:40:38 2014 No.6546187 >>6546126 How do you parse XML with PHP?

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 06:54:37 2014 No.6546196 File: 17 KB, 400x224, stock-footage-multi-ethnic-women-laughing-and-gossiping-on-comfortable-couch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6546184 >I assume you don't know what that word means,so your argument is invalid!

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 12:55:54 2014 No.6546446 >>6546187 Look it up on google.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 14:33:00 2014 No.6546582 >>6546196 >implying it's subjective which field contributes the most to human progress

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 14:40:47 2014 No.6546596 >>6546126 low IQ pleb ape too mentally bounded for pure math detected

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 15:33:17 2014 No.6546644 File: 959 KB, 448x352, the joke.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6546175

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 15:46:50 2014 No.6546668 >>6546126 applied math = physics you plebe

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 15:52:58 2014 No.6546676 >whynotboth.jpg Math and physics > everything else

Anonymous Wed May 21 16:02:31 2014 No.6546690

>>6546596
Sorry, I'm not autistic. I couldn't imagine wasting my time with sudoku puzzles all day long. And the worst thing is these people do it for free, because nobody pays for something which has no applications.

>>6546668
Lol no. There are alot more applications than physics.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 16:04:38 2014 No.6546695 >>6546690 >Sorry, I don't have a high IQ FTFY

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 16:14:40 2014 No.6546710 >>6546695 But I do. A score >170 is considered high. What are you even doing here? Shouldn't you be busy solving sudokus?

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 16:18:57 2014 No.6546714 >>6546710 >sudokus >dat dunning-kruger Don't worry, friend. I'm sure you'll find a nice niche for yourself with that sub-190 IQ somewhere. Maybe you can be some sort of lab monkey?

Anonymous Wed May 21 16:22:21 2014 No.6546722

I'd love to keep doing pure math, but I'm broke and need to make back the money I spent for college, so I'm taking some Statistics classes and preparing for Actuarial exams.

Doing degrees in pure math is a luxury for people who can afford it. Physics too, to some extent, though I'm pretty sure a Math degree will pay a lot more in the end than a Physics degree (especially if the math you specialize in has something to do with combinatorics and number theory).

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 16:26:16 2014 No.6546727 >>6546126 pure math has a tendency to become applied math.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 21 19:39:45 2014 No.6547114 Neat thread

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 03:16:34 2014 No.6547684 >>6546722 Number theory is a pretty useless skill from an employer's point of view.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 05:14:37 2014 No.6547754 Having sex with yourself > masturbation

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 06:50:43 2014 No.6547846 File: 1003 KB, 1600x1200, The_Scientific_Universe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6544665

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 06:58:45 2014 No.6547851 >>6547754 I'd fuck me

Anonymous Thu May 22 07:19:47 2014 No.6547863

>>6544665

Physics student here.

Fuck I wish I chose Maths.

I have an exam today on bullshit stamp collecty stuff I was supposed to apparently rote learn.

Physics is no more than rote learning hundreds of facts and simple equations that you do no more than simple calculus with.

Mathematical physics is the shit, but to do that I need to be a mathematics student and I'm not a Yank so I can't choose maths classes

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 07:23:59 2014 No.6547867 >>6547846 Mathematics isn't a science. It's better. Science deals with empiricism and approximation. Mathematics deals with absolute certainty.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 07:25:01 2014 No.6547868 >>6547863 >I'm not a Yank so I can't choose maths classes What does it matter if you're not an Amerifag?

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 07:33:42 2014 No.6547876 >>6547863 Other physics student here. It sounds like either your physical intuition is crap, or your teachers are crap. There is not supposed to be a lot of rote memorization, and mathematical-intuitive reasoning is supposed to fill in the gaps.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 07:54:02 2014 No.6547900 >>6547868 Because at this point the Americans usually chime in with "switch majors" "dude just take Linear Algebra 101 next semester" "swap your math minor to a major" and shit like our system works just like theirs

Anonymous Thu May 22 08:35:15 2014 No.6547953
File: 24 KB, 289x292, 1393561118610.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6547863
>Mathematical physics is the shit, but to do that I need to be a mathematics student

Can confirm. The pre-req for the mathematical physics course at my university was just some general 2nd year calculus course. In the first week we got blasted by a month's worth of abstract algebra and group theory. Over half the class dropped out

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 15:17:08 2014 No.6548385 File: 6 KB, 318x159, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6547953 Shirley you can't be serious? Why would you need that shit for physics?

Anonymous Thu May 22 15:55:34 2014 No.6548507
File: 18 KB, 636x460, 971756_602544603099888_1691483293_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6544665
Actually Physics >> Mathematics

Theoretical physicist find new forms of math in models of physics to describe the systems. Models that mathematicians want to loose their shit over cause they take forever to proof that the math is legit.

Plus physicist gave you the internet and freeware... You are welcome.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 15:57:21 2014 No.6548511 Mathematics <----> Physics

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 15:59:17 2014 No.6548516 >>6548385 Really? Group theory deals a lot with the physical symmetries, as an example.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 16:00:44 2014 No.6548519 >>6548507 > Plus engineers gave you the internet and freeware... You are welcome.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 19:40:52 2014 No.6548961 >>6548507 >Theoretical physicist find new forms of math in models of physics to describe the systems. >Models that mathematicians want to loose their shit over cause they take forever to proof that the math is legit. -1/12

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 19:51:48 2014 No.6548974 Physics>Chemistry>Mathematics>Engineering>Biology

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 19:54:12 2014 No.6548976 trigonomotry > algebra > precalc > arithmetic > geometry >>>>> calculus

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 19:56:49 2014 No.6548977 integration>>>differentiation

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 20:02:14 2014 No.6548983 File: 772 KB, 537x1439, 1398652933322.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Computer Science > Rest of STEM

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 20:10:45 2014 No.6548989 File: 107 KB, 872x476, Funny-monkey-in-huge-testicles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >tfw failed every class in high school and jumped of school after high school that >tfw only come to this board to see nerds arguing with echother

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 20:12:41 2014 No.6548993 >>6548989 >jumped of school after high school that it's a wonder why you failed every class.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 20:27:19 2014 No.6549010 >>6548989 >kek u guys are smort

>>	Anonymous Thu May 22 21:23:06 2014 No.6549134 >>6548983 Why isn't Cumuter Science part of the STEM acronym anyhow? Is it because ti's fucking bullshit? Or is it because it's the hard science equivalent of getting an MBA or a law degree?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 00:44:44 2014 No.6549448 >Americucks

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 00:58:10 2014 No.6549453 >>6548507 >Plus physicist gave you the internet and freeware >Plus physicist gave you freeware You invented spam you little shits The world is better without you

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 01:02:18 2014 No.6549458 >>6549453 Shits delicious

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 01:03:11 2014 No.6549461 >>6549134 That's what the T part is for, you retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 04:40:18 2014 No.6549662 Physics > Applied Math > Biology > Theoretical CS > Chemistry > Philosophy > Pure math

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:08:27 2014 No.6550736 >>6549662 Philosophy is applied logic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:10:59 2014 No.6550742 >>6550736 The majority of philosophers does not understand logic and even those who try to use logic often know nothing deeper than IQ test tier 1st order logic. Logic is a field of math.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:14:31 2014 No.6550749 >>6550742 Math is a field of logic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:17:46 2014 No.6550758 >>6550749 Nope. Gödel proved that logic is a strict subset of math.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:28:31 2014 No.6550786 >>6550758 You have no idea what you are talking about.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:30:16 2014 No.6550792 >>6550786 I know very well what I'm talking about. Gödel proved that there are mathematical theorems which cannot be deduced within logic Therfore logic is a subject of math but math itself in its entirety cannot be a subject of logic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:32:31 2014 No.6550801 File: 141 KB, 329x418, 1377483617740.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6550792 >Gödel proved that there are mathematical theorems which cannot be deduced within logic Therfore logic is a subject of math

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:33:31 2014 No.6550805 >>6550792 I'm not the other guy and I'm posting from the front page but it's clearly obvious that you don't understand Godel's incompleteness theorems.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:34:03 2014 No.6550807 >>6550801 Logic being a subject of math is a simple fact independent of Gödel. Please work on your reading comprehension and don't make yourself look more retarded than you already are.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:34:39 2014 No.6550808 >>6550805 I'm a Godelologist, and the other anon is correct

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:35:18 2014 No.6550810 >>6550805 Cool assertion, pop sci kid. How about you post your dumbed down youtube version of the incompleteness theorem, so we can all have a laugh at your ignorance? Protip: My post was correct.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:35:38 2014 No.6550811 >>6550807 >Please work on your reading comprehension Please work on your typing comprehension.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:38:57 2014 No.6550821 >>6550811 Do you want me to apologize for assuming you were at least of average intelligence? I'm so sorry I couldn't anticipate how defective you are. Thanks for letting me know. Next time I'm gonna dumb down my posts for you.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:39:23 2014 No.6550823 >>6550792 You don't even know what logic is.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:41:48 2014 No.6550829 >>6550823 I hope you are aware of the fact that "logic" in the context of math refers to formal logic and not to your reddit "if I disagree with an argument I'll call it a straw man" definition of "logic".

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:43:33 2014 No.6550832 >>6550823 I've been teaching formal logic in the past. Get rekt, kid.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:44:08 2014 No.6550833 >>6550810 No it's wrong. There are other requirements. Your explanation IS the pop-sci explanation.

Anonymous Fri May 23 17:45:02 2014 No.6550834

>>6550821
Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it ever so much more apidly. If cluelessness were crude oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou. You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few chromosomes short of a full genome. Worse than that, you top-post. In HTML. God created toads, houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks,slugs, leeches, and intestinal rasites, then he lowered his standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, microcephalous, hairy-livered inbred trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good. You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your markup doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together. You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:45:10 2014 No.6550835 >>6550829 There are different systems of logic that one talks about when they talk about formal logic. I suggest you return to rebbit since that's where you're obviously used to having this discussion.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:49:31 2014 No.6550845 >>6550835 >M-muh modality Take it back to the philosophy department.

Anonymous Fri May 23 17:50:39 2014 No.6550848

>>6550833
The exact details are of no importance to the point I made. Are you too autistic to pay attention to the context? My post was merely meant to correct the moron who didn't know about the relation between math and logic.

>>6550834
That copypasta is older than you. Come back when you're 18.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:52:56 2014 No.6550857 >>6550848 Come back when you've learned to not argue about things that you have less knowledge of than if you'd just read its wikipedia page.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:54:40 2014 No.6550862 >>6550857 Come back when you learned to post actual arguments instead of projections.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:57:29 2014 No.6550871 >>6550792 >>6550807 No he didn't. All contemporary math rests on its foundations and can in principle be expressed in the language of fully formal type checked syntactic proofs, and thanks to logicians this is being made a reality.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:58:15 2014 No.6550872 >>6550857 Are you saying wikipedia isn't a reliable source of education?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 17:59:10 2014 No.6550877 >>6550862 ∧＿∧ /￣￣￣￣ ( ´∀｀) < Look who's talking! ( ) ＼＿＿＿＿ \| \| \| (_＿)＿)

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:00:27 2014 No.6550880 >>6550862 You too buddy.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:01:32 2014 No.6550883 >>6550871 Come on. At least try to read up on the incompleteness theorem on wikipedia. It has been mentioned ITT and it explains why you're wrong. >>6550880 I posted the facts.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:01:36 2014 No.6550884 >>6550872 No, I'm saying he hasn't even learned that much.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:02:52 2014 No.6550887 >>6550883 Your facts were false.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:02:57 2014 No.6550888 File: 33 KB, 400x400, 1369517862702.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6550883 >I posted the facts.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:03:05 2014 No.6550889 >>6550884 Who is "he"?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:04:18 2014 No.6550892 >>6550889 Are you retarded or just pretending to be?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:05:14 2014 No.6550893 >>6550887 Facts are by definition never wrong. >>6550888 >>>/b/

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:06:59 2014 No.6550896 >>6550893 > >>>/b/ Come back when you learned to post actual arguments instead of projections. >Facts are by definition never wrong. Then they weren't even facts!

Anonymous Fri May 23 18:07:29 2014 No.6550897

>>6550883
Sorry dude but the incompleteness theorems say nothing of the sort. Do you actually even know what the incompleteness theorems formally state? Have you ever even heard of terms like "ω-complete models" and "arithmetization"? Put down the pop mathematics books and educate yourself.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:07:58 2014 No.6550898 >>6550892 neither >>6550896 You can check the facts I posted. Ask google.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:09:03 2014 No.6550906 >>6550898 >You can check the facts I posted. I have read your posts and I found an alarmingly small number of facts. >Ask google. Confirmed for full retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:11:52 2014 No.6550910 >>6550897 Tell me how to "educate" myself. How about you link the youtube videos which taught you logic? Was it Vsauce? Or maybe Numberphile?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:13:50 2014 No.6550914 >>6550906 Are you seriously rejecting google as a method of information retrieval? This has to be b8.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:14:11 2014 No.6550915 >>6550906 >>6550898 >>6550897 >>6550896 >>6550893 >>6550892 >>6550889 >>6550888 >>6550887 >>6550884 >>6550883 >>6550880 >>6550872 >>6550871 >>6550862 >>6550857 you are fucking killing this board much less this thread

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:15:25 2014 No.6550920 >>6550910 I was taught personally by Boolos/

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:15:40 2014 No.6550921 >>6550914 I am rejecting the ideas of anyone who is still dumb enough to use Google's ``services'' despite it being shown again and again that they have negative regard for their users' privacy.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:17:23 2014 No.6550926 >>6550915 Sorry, would you rather we keep the arguments to 0.99...=?=1 and consciousness threads?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:20:05 2014 No.6550932 >>6550910 You will never get an education beyond the mental health department if all you're capable of doing is spamming cheap insults.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:23:04 2014 No.6550941 >>6550921 You think smartness over privacy is 100% correlated with smartness in all other fields?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:23:18 2014 No.6550942 >>6544665 >Logic > Mathematics > Physics ... > ... Irrelevant

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:24:21 2014 No.6550946 >>6550921 I have no problem with google's privacy policy. I have nothing to hide.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:25:23 2014 No.6550948 >>6550941 No, I don't. >>6550946 kqk

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:25:24 2014 No.6550949 >>6550942 Logic is a strict subset of math. You should of read the thread before posting.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:25:31 2014 No.6550951 Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:26:36 2014 No.6550954 >>6550949 Math is a subset of logic. Are you twelve?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:27:57 2014 No.6550962 >>6550948 >No, I don't. Then why do you reject others' ideas on the basis of their use of google's services? I happen to know that Paul Cohen had a gmail account.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:29:12 2014 No.6550966 >>6550954 Logic is trivially a subset of math. The other inclusion was disproved by Gödel. Therefore logic is a strict subset of math.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:30:47 2014 No.6550972 >>6550966 >Logic is trivially a subset of math. Nope. >The other inclusion was disproved by Godel. Nope. Do you even know who Godel is? You certainly don't know his work. >Therefore logic is a strict subset of math. Hah!

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:31:02 2014 No.6550974 >>6550962 Well, I always felt forcing was somewhat suspect.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:31:32 2014 No.6550975 >>6550966 It won't become right even if you repeat that wrong and delusional garbage a thousand more times.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:32:45 2014 No.6550978 >>6550975 >>6550966 Newfag here, is /sci/ always like watching 5yr olds fight?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:32:54 2014 No.6550979 >>6550972 You've been shitposting for hours. Are you having fun doing this? Don't answer, the question was rhetorical. Keep suffering, you mentally ill person. You deserve it.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:33:25 2014 No.6550981 >>6550966 >There is only one axiomatic system

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:34:23 2014 No.6550983 >>6550975 The good thing about facts is that they remain true, no matter how hard a fool on 4chan denies them.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:34:49 2014 No.6550986 >>6550983 Then why are you denying them?

>>	What the fuck Anonymous Fri May 23 18:35:47 2014 No.6550987 Bait much ... Why does this have so many posts? Math is a subset of logic guys, go home

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:36:13 2014 No.6550991 >>6550978 We can have mature and rational discussion as well. Check out our threads about consciousness. >>6550981 You didn't even bother reading the wiki article on the incompleteness theorem.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:37:21 2014 No.6550993 >>6550986 I don't. >>6550987 Logic is a subset of math. The other inclusion was disproved by Gödel.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:37:43 2014 No.6550996 File: 983 KB, 500x364, ok.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6550979

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:37:50 2014 No.6550997 >>6550991 >The two results are widely, but not universally, interpreted as showing that Hilbert's program to find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all mathematics is impossible, giving a negative answer to Hilbert's second problem.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:38:44 2014 No.6551001 >>6550993 >The other inclusion was disproved by Gödel. But that's wrong, you fucking retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:39:36 2014 No.6551004 >>6550997 Great job. You proved to us that you know how to copypaste. We're all proud of you. Next step: Try to understand the sentence you copypasted.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:40:12 2014 No.6551006 >>6550993 >Logic is a subset of math. The other inclusion was disproved by Gödel. Can you link me to his proof of this? Or some article discussing the proof, even?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:40:40 2014 No.6551010 >>6551001 Nope, it is right.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:41:51 2014 No.6551015 >>6550993 >I don't. Nice denial you got going there.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:42:17 2014 No.6551016 >>6551010 Haha, good one.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:42:41 2014 No.6551017 >>6551006 Look up the "incompleteness theorem". >>6551015 I didn't deny anything.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:44:02 2014 No.6551021 >>6551017 I know about the incompleteness theorem, but how does that suggest that logic is a subset of math?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:44:12 2014 No.6551022 >>6551017 I understand the incompleteness theorem and its proof. It is not directly relevant to this discussion.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:44:38 2014 No.6551024 >>6551004 Just because you can't find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all mathematics doesn't mean different axiomatic systems can't in essence describe all of mathematics.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:45:05 2014 No.6551025 >>6551022 >>6551021 If you don't see how it's relevant to the discussion, then obviously you didn't fully understand it.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:46:23 2014 No.6551027 >>6551025 This is the funniest post you've made yet.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:48:43 2014 No.6551033 >>6551024 What if you just put all of those systems together then?

Anonymous Fri May 23 18:48:46 2014 No.6551034

>>6551025
... On that enlightening note, i encourage everyone to recognize that this anon won't be convinced by anything and this argument is pointless. I recommend we let this thread - and the retardation contained within - die a peaceful death. By stopping posting.

Sage

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:49:45 2014 No.6551036 >>6551033 Enjoy your le happy contradiction.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:51:17 2014 No.6551041 >>6551034 Sage is not a downvote.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:53:49 2014 No.6551048 >>6551041 It's culturally regarded on 4chan as a way of showing disapproval though. On another note, now that we can't see sages it's impossible to see polite sages such as off-topic post and the like, which is really annoying.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:56:03 2014 No.6551053 >>6551048 There is no such thing as a "polite sage". Announcing your sage is always an insult. Don't do it, faggot.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:57:41 2014 No.6551058 >>6551048 Disgusting.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 18:59:12 2014 No.6551063 >>6551053 >>6551058 Plebs.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:00:22 2014 No.6551067 >>6551024 You are wrong. Logic is still a strict subset of mathematics as proved with the Incompleteness Theorem.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:01:33 2014 No.6551071 >>6551067 That is most definitely not what the incompleteness theorem says.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:02:46 2014 No.6551074 >>6551071 It's an obvious corollary of the incompleteness theorem.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:04:10 2014 No.6551076 >>6551074 Prove it.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:06:19 2014 No.6551080 >>6551076 What part of the word "obvious" did you not understand?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:07:10 2014 No.6551081 >>6551080 Prove that it is obvious.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:07:19 2014 No.6551082 >>6551080 What part of ``no, it isn't'' don't you understand?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:07:23 2014 No.6551083 >>6551067 No, you are wrong. Your mere assertion proves nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:10:07 2014 No.6551089 >>6551081 The proof is left as an exercise to the reader. >>6551082 The part where you failed to provide an argument. >>6551083 Nope, I am right. Your mere assertion disproves nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:12:16 2014 No.6551094 >>6551089 Shifting the burden of proof is the lowest troll tactic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:13:55 2014 No.6551098 File: 58 KB, 835x349, dennett.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6551094 Shifting the burden of proof is a valid method of winning a debate in philosophy. Ask Daniel Dennett (pic related).

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:18:42 2014 No.6551105 >>6551098 The burden of proof is retarded/childish. Both parties have a responsibility. Daniel Dennett is awesome though.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:19:47 2014 No.6551109 >>6551094 Math professors are shifting the burden of proof every day by assigning proofs as homeworks to their students.

Anonymous Fri May 23 19:22:13 2014 No.6551115

>>6551105
>Both parties have a responsibility.
Prove it.

>Daniel Dennett is awesome though.
I agree. His argumentative method of "Here are your arguments. I can't refute them and I don't have arguments on my own, but I won the debate." is amazing and universally applicable on 4chan.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:22:43 2014 No.6551118 >>6551115 >Prove it. Let's do it together. :^)

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:24:07 2014 No.6551122 >>6551089 >Your mere assertion disproves nothing. I didn't realize my "different axiomatic systems does not equal a complete and consistent set of axioms" was a mere assertion.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:27:19 2014 No.6551130 >>6551122 >ignoratio elenchi

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:29:02 2014 No.6551133 >>6551130 Right. Goodbye.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:29:30 2014 No.6551134 >>6551109 Your troll shit is not anyone's homework.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:31:52 2014 No.6551139 >>6551134 The same thing has been said to Riemann and now they are all failing to prove his hypothesis.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:33:26 2014 No.6551143 The incompleteness theorems say nothing about math being a subset of logic or logic being a subset of math.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:34:25 2014 No.6551145 >>6551143 Logic being a subset of math is a trivial fact. Math not being a subset of logic is a trivial corollary of the incompleteness theorem. Please use your brain.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 19:39:15 2014 No.6551154 >>6551145 >Logic being a subset of math is a trivial fact. Haha, no. What the hell? >Math not being a subset of logic is a trivial corollary of the incompleteness theorem. Haha, no. What the hell? If they're so trivial, why don't you prove them?

Anonymous Fri May 23 20:09:24 2014 No.6551195

>>6551145
I think I finally understand what this guy's been horribly trying to communicate.

Logic systems are axiomatic systems. So you can study them as a subset of mathematics (which deals with axiomatic systems). However it's more complex than that because part of the definition of axiomatic systems require a logic system (as well as a language). So if you do things strictly from this viewpoint it becomes kind of like one of those snake eating its own tail kind of things. At some point you've got to just assume a meta-logic and meta-language and stuff upon which everything is founded. So that dude is right about logic being a subset of math but by the same reasoning math is also a subset of logic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 20:35:05 2014 No.6551255 >>6551195 You're talking out of your ass. Taking the middle ground to sound intelligent may have worked for your hs debate team, but there's no need to do it here while you're anonymous.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 23 20:43:26 2014 No.6551273 >>6551255 No, I'm just not ignoring the relationship between a logic that's an axiomatic system and a meta-logic upon which it's founded.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:04:54 2014 No.6552107 >>6551154 Why would I prove something trivial? Your lack of intelligence is not my problem.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:09:08 2014 No.6552116 >>6552107 haha

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:21:46 2014 No.6552159 >>6552107 nice ad hominem Your argument is always independent of the arguing parties.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:24:20 2014 No.6552167 >>6552159 Damn straight. My argument is right, irregardless of whether you understand it or not.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:26:46 2014 No.6552173 >>6552167 >My argument is right then you should just post it and be done with it instead of insulting that guy

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 03:35:48 2014 No.6552191 >>6552173 I did. Learn to read.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 04:50:07 2014 No.6552283 >>6552167 >irregardless Hahaha! Oh, wow.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 05:49:52 2014 No.6552333 >>6547684 >I have no idea what cryptanalysis is.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 05:59:23 2014 No.6552335 >>6544670 heh

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 07:38:06 2014 No.6552443 File: 28 KB, 356x306, 1396109362481.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6546129 Guud wan!!!!!!!!!! Laffed so hadr!

>>	None !!BJiYgff8zf2 Sat May 24 10:55:09 2014 No.6552593 Maths is a logical system. Hence, maths is a subset of logic. What's so hard to understand?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:03:23 2014 No.6552597 >>6548519 Any physicist can be an engineer Not all engineers can be physicists Physicists 1 Engineers 0

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:06:26 2014 No.6552602 >>6552593 Logic is an axiomatic system. Hence, logic is a subset of math. What's so hard to understand?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:07:29 2014 No.6552603 >>6546126 Anything > Biology

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:13:50 2014 No.6552609 >>6552593 Math is not a logical system. Contrary to pseudo-intellectual freshmen beliefs there is more to math than fully logical proofs.

>>	None !!BJiYgff8zf2 Sat May 24 11:15:43 2014 No.6552610 >>6552602 >>6552609 Totally incorrect. Axiomatic systems are a subset of logical systems.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:25:55 2014 No.6552619 >>6552610 That doesn't imply that logical systems are not also axiomatic systems. The two are not mutually exclusive. Truth is that both are correct.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:30:57 2014 No.6552626 >>6552603 > Anything > Biology Absolutely wrong. Counterexample: Geology < Biology

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:37:05 2014 No.6552630 >>6552610 Math is not an axiomatic system.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 11:50:37 2014 No.6552641 >>6552609 >fully logical proofs That's all that matters in math.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 12:01:56 2014 No.6552651 >>6552641 Is this what freshmen actually believe?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 12:49:02 2014 No.6552717 >>6552651 It's what anyone who actually cares about math believes.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 12:51:57 2014 No.6552724 >>6544669 >but who are you quoting? I fucking hate it when people do this. It's implying green text. Get it together man.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 14:56:13 2014 No.6552869 >>6552717 Doing your freshman homework doesn't mean you "actually care about math". Protip: There is a lot more to math than proofs.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:06:37 2014 No.6552995 I did Chemistry because I enjoyed it more than Physics or Mathematics, why do people get so upset about what others do? It takes all kinds of people to make society function

Anonymous Sat May 24 16:32:02 2014 No.6553031

>>6552869
Go find someone else to do your intro to algebra/analysis homework and help you cheat on exams. I'm not a freshman and I don't have any homework.

Your "muh morals, muh intuition, muh style, muh intuition, muh social activity" tripe has no place in math. Math is about proof and conjecture only. That's objective and independent of human emotional responses.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:35:25 2014 No.6553044 >>6553031 People with your attitude usually drop out before getting their BSc degree. You are too autistic - even for math.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:37:46 2014 No.6553049 wat

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:41:58 2014 No.6553060 >>6553044 I posted what math is about and how mathematicians, including the leading ones who have far beyond a measly undergrad degree to prove themselves, go about their day. Stay deceived.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:44:15 2014 No.6553064 >>6553060 You posted what you mistakenly believe mathematicians do. How about you leave your fantasy world and take a look at reality?

Anonymous Sat May 24 16:45:38 2014 No.6553067

>>6553031

You do realize many great mathematicians romanticize mathematics. Intuition is also a huge part of mathematics, in that, it gives you direction (even it may be a wrong one at first).

Math is about exploration, discovery and those two things are deeply linked to human emotions.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:55:36 2014 No.6553093 File: 18 KB, 250x250, ishygddt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6544665 Art > Science

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 16:57:29 2014 No.6553097 >>6553067 Pro tip People of any profession will romanticize what they do

Anonymous Sat May 24 16:58:39 2014 No.6553101

>>6553064
I only shared the truth. Keep up this butthurt though. How about you re-read your comment but instead address it to yourself as it should be addressed?

>>6553067
Nope. Proof is independent of emotions and fairytales. Intuition is meaningless when dealing with mathematical facts and conjecture is based on rational inquiry, not some eroticized "exploration". Emotionally weighing one piece of math over another is intellectually wrong and only makes a rotted mathematician, purely limited in the landscape and astray in his irrelevant feelings.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:09:56 2014 No.6553118 >>6553101 As a human bean you cannot escape emotions.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:10:16 2014 No.6553119 >>6547684 Tell that to the people making millions working for the NSA

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:13:59 2014 No.6553127 >>6553118 Beans don't have any intelligence so this is understandable.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:14:11 2014 No.6553129 >>6553119 They don't do it with number theory.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:37:59 2014 No.6553158 math and physics benefit greatly from each others' input. It's a great synergy, and we should unite for the greater good of knowledge. And to make fun of economists.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 24 17:40:27 2014 No.6553161 >>6553158 What's wrong with economics? Is babby too dumb for statistics?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]