• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is legitimately cool when a bunch of mathematicians get together in a room and say “Look at all the cool shapes and patterns we made,” then show it to a physicist who goes all frantic and starts shouting “OMG! I understand how stuff works!”

    • Soleos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Gotta love how the more “Applied” a field is, the more “Impure” it is.

    • I'm back on my BS 🤪@lemmy.autism.place
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      The test to know if anything is an absolute truth is if it is called an absolute truth. If it is called an absolute truth, then it isn’t an absolute truth. If it isn’t called an absolute truth, then it isn’t an absolute truth. Absolute truths don’t exist. If someone tells you something is an absolute truth, stop listening to them.

    • MBM@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The way I see it, axioms and notation are made up but everything that follows is absolute truth

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Axioms can be demonstrated. They don’t have to be purely theoretical.

        Mass and Energy are axiomatic to the study of physics, for instance. The periodic table is axiomatic to understanding chemistry. You can establish something as self-evident that’s also demonstrably true.

        One could argue that mathematics is less a physical thing than a language to describe a thing. But once you have that shared language, you can factually guarantee certain fundamental ideas. The idea of an empty set is demonstrable, for instance. You can even demonstrate the idea of infinity, assuming you’re not existing in a closed system.

        You can posit axioms that don’t fit reality, too. And you can build up features of this hypothetical space that diverge from our own. But then you can demonstrate why those axioms can’t apply to this space and agree as such with whomever you’re trying to convey ideas.

        When we talk about “absolute truth”, we’re talking about a point of universal rational consensus. Mathematics is a language that helps us extend subjective observation into objective conclusion. That’s what makes it a useful tool in scientific inquiry.

        • Malgas@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The thing that is absolute is a predicate of the form “if [axioms] then [theorems]”.

          And the fun thing about if statements is that they can be true even when the premise is false.

          • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Of course in boolean algebra “if [false] then p” is always true no matter “p”, but it’s not telling us much.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re made up constructs that reflect the absolute truth when applied correctly (from his perspective).

  • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t understand this meme format. Are the speech bubbles the texts received or the texts sent? It looks like they’re typing, so could be both.

  • Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Computer science, we use both of your tools to solve problems. And make an electronic canarys aka AI

    Which dont solve much :/

  • hardy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Bruh… then imagine how hard a philosopher’s world would be like…

  • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    If someone needs another existental crisis here’s a prompt:

    • Is math universal or is it a system of thought invented by humans and it only makes sense to us?
    • Artyom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Good thing physicists solved that problem already; if everything is made up and can only be observed through our preconceived notions and there’s no way to prove a world beyond them, then it doesn’t matter. The universe we can observe is reality and everything beyond that is beyond meaningful definition and is therefore useless, which is how we define “philosophy”.

    • Codex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Models. Humans hold models of the world in their minds, math helps you understand and create more complex and consistent models. You always exist in a simulation of your own construction to make sense of the universe.

      My feeling is that no model can ever fully capture a complete description of reality, the information isn’t compressible to such a degree that approximations or abstractions can be lossless.

      Most of what we consider to be invention is merely combinatoric novelty.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Math is definitely universal. The math behind things in science wouldn’t suddenly change on different alien planets. Take things like V = IR. That relies on multiplication and division. It’s gonna be the same on other planets. The units, notation, etc. will be different but the concepts would be the same.

      • I'm back on my BS 🤪@lemmy.autism.place
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’m no STEM major, so I may be way off, but this is how I see it.

        V = IR isn’t math. It’s a way of defining the relationship and outcome of two specific physical qualities. It says that we combine the resistance of a medium ( R) with the current flowing through it (I) into another joint emergent quality we call voltage (V). We do this because it makes our understanding of the physical world easier to manage since this relationship has helpful applications.

        Math is simply patterns in the relationships of quantities. It excludes any physical units or qualities. In other words, math is the art of counting.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think you’re misunderstanding my point. I’m not saying the relationship of V = IR means math exists, what I’m saying is that because that relationship factually exists aliens would have a way to quantify that relationship. Because of that they would have a way to express the concepts of multiplication and division.

    • smeg@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      BURN THE HERETIC!

      But seriously though, yes, but useless isn’t the same as pointless. Art by some definitions is useless, but it can still have a point, even if that point it just to be fun.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Theories can be a stepping stone to other theories. Until we explore those chains, we don’t know if there is anything useful at the end.

      E.g. initially, lasers were a solution looking for a problem. An interesting quirk possible due to some interesting bit of physics.

      Maths explores idea spaces. Much of that is purely of interest to other mathematicians. However, it sometimes intersects with areas of interest to other scientists, at which point it becomes extremely useful.