Why is it true? Why does it make sense? Why is it so orderly? Studying Math, I can't help but concern myself with these questions. When you think about it, Physics is ultimately an "extension" of Math. I mean, the Universe is written in a language, Math. The Universe is written in that code, those symbols of chalk on blackboards, those symbols are everything, everything is numbers. Subatomic particles that occupy no space are like the points of a Cartesian plane that also occupy no space, and everything in Physics boils down to beautiful mathematical formulas. And I think as we make more discoveries in Physics, we'll be able to connect the dots between Math and Physics, just as the fundamental particles are like points of Geometry. So Physics can exist because Math exists. Personally, I think that's beautiful and it even makes me feel love, but at the same time it begs the question, why does Math exist at all? The way I see it, Math is very complex, and there are many subjects to study in Math, like Calculus, Topology, Algebra and all else, so my guess is that these are all the twigs and branches of a big tree, and if so, what exactly is the main trunk? In other words, think of it like unfolding origami. What was the simple, initial thing that unfolded into these more complex structures of Math? Something more simple must have given birth to these complex branches, no? And why does this main trunk, whatever it is, exists? Just why does Math exist, why does it make sense, and why is it true? How come there is order in Math instead of chaos? Is it just something inevitable, naturally occurring, that just spawns into existence straight from non existence? Maybe that's the case. Tell me your wisdom.
Why does Math exist?
Sometimes I wish I were born in 2050 instead, just so I could be alive when we make more discoveries.
Reality is unintuitive the closer you look at it. Look up quantum entanglement. Shit makes no fucking sense. We're probably just too retarded to grasp everything.
Math exists because 'it' exists.
In compute ('time') we only care if it is 1, even, or not-1-or-even
But to even do that we have to define our boundaries, which is the same as saying 'how do we define 1, in this instance?'
So our boundaries are '1', which has a unique definition of 'start of a divisor set'. So to use maths on something divisible, it has to exist. Maths cannot address 'indivisibility' because the FIRST mathematical operator you actually do is FORM THE QUESTION, which is 'defining 1' before trying to balance your equation to 0.
So the reason why maths makes sense is because it 'is' how you interact with infinity/time. If it doesn't exist then it doesn't matter, because then it is part of something outside of 'your' time.
And in truth this is the only 'true' state that can exist. Time is simply the division of 0, but to start forming equations or observations you have to somehow define '1'. So, Time = 0 / 1
Everything makes sense because you already have the number '1' to derive sense from.
Welcome to maths. It's better than religion really.
Mathematics does study objects but more fundamentally math in almost all level of abstraction is interested in relations between objects and structures arising from that.
Physics aim is not to find "true" reality but though experiments formulate models for reality with predictive power. In example Newton's law of gravitation is not exactly true but is useful model for macro scale gravity. Now these models usually describe relations between objects and so they can be translated to math. Many laws of physics take form of differential equations or PDE's for example.
Now we can use math to analyze our models and see how they actually correspond to reality and if our theories seem convincing we can make predictions about reality that our models predicts. Black holes are great example of this and many other phenomena.
It is true because it is God's left hand. Suffering.
It maskes sense because it is pure cold logic.
It is only orderly because our systematic method of accumulating knowledge has made it so.
It exists for humans so we can take knowledge and apply it where best suits. It exists by itself merely because it can be extrapolated by our biological sensors...
The main branch is pure logic.
It exists because of basic observations made by humanity as it evolved and grew in nature.
The first thing that came in math was a fixed point then another. Then a line. Geometry.
There is order in math because there is order in the universe even within chaos one can latch on to a tendril and begin working his way up a cthulu like entity to figure out it's workings.
>example in nature: House lice and humans. Who quickly figured out they could drain us of blood. Just like we figured out we could drain Gaia herself of energy...
Geometry exists because you can extrapolate it from nature. Once aware of it you can begin to see patterns of it all over the place.
Math exists because we exist. We are a part of it. We are nature. We are star dust. We are aware of it.
It makes sense because we gave it sensation.
It is true because it is what we are.
It is orderly because chaos and order are one in the same. One cannot be without the other and as such when one is applied to the other you can extrapolate their true meaning. (Hail Eris By The Way)
It is. It becomes from nothing. Well...one thing. I believe in a higher power.
>Mathematics does study objects but more fundamentally math in almost all level of abstraction
I would go even further, I would go as far as saying Mathematics is purely immaterial. And at the same time it is immaterial, it gives form to material things. It's almost as if god itself was Math, as put it, it's better than religion. And it's also somewhat related to Plato's idea of forms. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that Math is 100% immaterial but at the same time it gives birth to material things.
Maths is simply your relationship with infinity. It is all about placeholder and its different forms. Every mathematical disciple is literally trying to describe placeholder to an Nth level of abstraction for precision.
Acting is about placeholder, algebra is, so is chemistry. Either you are trying to find a placeholder to manipulate, or to remove.
Is this true why in the Fibonacci sequence the number 1 is repeated 2 times before turning into other numbers?
>to start forming equations or observations you have to somehow define '1'
This is the first 1=0+1
>So our boundaries are '1', which has a unique definition of 'start of a divisor set'. So to use maths on something divisible, it has to exist. Maths cannot address 'indivisibility' because the FIRST mathematical operator you actually do is FORM THE QUESTION, which is 'defining 1' before trying to balance your equation to 0.
After defining 1 as "true" you can keep going to the next sequence 1+1=2
First we need to have a 0 to insert the boundary for the number 1, then second we need to double the unit before making the number 2 and 3 etc.
It feels like the first number 1 doesn't exist at all and its somehow just an "idea of boundary". The second number 1 is the concrete "truth" and physical existence of the number. But when you actually create the number 2, 1+1=2, the first "idea" number 1 is also there as physical because it needs to be for the causality to work for the next in the sequence, number 2.
It feels stupid writing this and if it didn't make sense I ask, why is the number 1 repeated before the sequence starts to become different every single number?
Easily best girl
>Math exist
It doesn't.
such a cesspool of stupidity
Math is a language. Any language is a human attempt to formally describe the observable universe. Formalization of physical things leads to the formalization of the inter-relations between physical things.
Thus both physical things and abstract things are defined. The language describes, and the language is in a format which allows for recording and arrangement of descriptions. Any re-arrangement of descriptions becomes a simulation of a non-observed event. This is useful. Remember, math is a human attempt at language which formally describes the observable universe. The ability to record and then re-arrange descriptions allows insight into a possible way the universe might behave. Formally defining, recording, and arranging through language also provides a tool to maintain functional comprehension of things beyond our human brain's ability to inherently comprehend things.
The universe just is. A photon may be modeled as a wave, as a particle, and as many other things, but photon is a photon. We did not start our language, math, and models around the photon, because it was not obviously observable. So we have had to arrange old descriptions and pieces of models to successfully talk about the observed behavior of a photon.
It's very important to understand the division between the two. The universe is not math. (it's also just kinda useful in general to understand the limitations of usage of any language). I think the real root question you have is "why is the universe so consistent such that we can so successfully describe it and predict it with the language of math?"
The universe is what it is.
you're clever. you explain things in a very accurate and concise manner. With a bit of irony, I think what you say would go way over the layman's head.
this is the only correct answer.
Math is just the syntax
Math is the abstract reflection of the phenomena perceived by your senses; deconstructed down into symbolic representations of the operations in the world, stop romanticizing math.
1 is the boundary, not 0. 0 does not exist which is why 1 is repeated. The first one is the concrete truth, and is needed to create the next in the sequence, which is itself because there is no other thing to derive from.
1 does not have to be defined, if 0 has no definition or is nothing. There cannot be nothing as that would propagate nothing. This is why the fist 1 feels like it doesn't exist, because it's hard to accept that there was ALWAYS 1 there to start the sequence, but nothing to start the 1.
The two 1's on the other hand are the same thing obviously, the same value. The only difference is the second 1 came after as validation of the "truth".
Then it falls into the realm of Plato's Divided line...
Consequence of the underlying logic of the universe. What and why is it? Do not know.
The issue is fairly clear. Systems in the universe, including computational machinery, appear to run on signals. Everything is memory, memory is changed by signals. Memory is just state. And yet signals also appear to be math. It's a circular dependency. It cannot yet be reduced further.
The main question becomes if the means for the universe to be what it is and do what it does is entirely self contained (veritably so, though unlikely), or if it is reliant on something "external".
That other guy is just being a manic asshole. The reason Fib starts with two ones is because it's simply the series of numbers that have the pattern of each individual number being the sum of the two numbers preceding it. There is nothing before 1 in the sequence (or there is infinite zeros, I guess you could say, before forming the same pattern negatively) so it starts off as 1, (1+) 1, (1+1) 2, (1+2) 3. I assume you're ascribing important significance to the series because the ratios between the values in it gradually get closer to the golden ratio Phi, however they are asymptotic, in that they get infinitely closer but never reach it.
Your understanding of language is wrong. Our perception of language is the recognition of patterns and our use of them to manipulate the universe. Spoken languages aren't inherent to the universe as a whole but numbers are. Everything is quantifiable and the patterns we have picked from those quantities exist without our observation of them. You seem to understand this with the photon but fail to apply it to theoretical numbers. The dumbasses in this thread saying the universe is just math are absolutely wrong. It can be thoroughly, possibly completely, explained through math but it does exist before it. for example our understanding of any physics completely breaks down at a singularity (such as the theorized cause of the big bang, or what's supposedly the heart of a black hole).
You must be some sort of satirical master
I might have expressed myself wrong but I meant the 1 to be the boundary.
The picture kinda expresses what I feel about the number ones. Notice how they need each other to be seen with the contrast, you can only accept each one of them if you have the other as well.
My question is, does:
>Anything raised to the power of 0 equals to 1
Has to do with the fact that its pointing out towards the first [math]immaterial[/math] number 1?
Maybe the first 1 doesn't make intuitive sense because humans have hard time with the concept of nothing?
You have a very illogical approach to math.
The reason any number to the power of 0 is one is not a simple answer, and has to be inferred from other rules of exponents.
First you have to understand that when you use a negative exponent you're finding the equality of a fraction of that number to it's positive exponent as a denominator for one.
so 5^-2 = 1/5^2
You also need to understand that when you multiply two of the same values to any exponent, those exponents simply get added together
(5^2)*(5^5)=5^7
so in order to get 5^0 we could do this
(5^2)*(5^-2)=5^0
which can also be written as
(5^2)*(1/5^2)
which equals
(5^2)/(5^2)
and any number divided by itself is 1.
There are many things in math (and physics) that defy intuition because thy way by defining them isn't a straight arrow.
you can look into the field of philosophy of math if you want to read more about this
>inb4 some engineer calls me a brainlet for mentioning philosophy
What I mean is that I am trying to approach math illogically after understanding the logic process.
It's like trying to give meaning to things, just food for thought.
i like this interpretation. i don't know if i agree, but it is a good sentiment.
particularly, much of math specifically tackles the discrete. you are right though, that reinterpreting infinite as the limit of discrete is useful, and usually does work out.
my particular quarrel though is that particular infinite things are not the limit of discrete.
e.g. reals as the competition of rationals. sometimes infinite is the limit of a different infinity.
Maths is an evolved instrument, nothing more.
Infinity is not a number, it is a property of numbers.
The fact that it's asymptotic does not take away significance from its relation to Phi, it literally defines it.
Also, that's not the "reason" that 1 repeats itself. It's merely the pattern we've deduced from an emerging sequence. To say "it's like that because it's like that" would only be the case if it were base reality/ perfectly reduced, which it isn't given that it is emergent. The reason why the fib is the way it is is also the reason that other things are the way they are.
stop huffing paint you fucking autist
god you fucking faggots who write posts like this while not actually knowing shit make me so irrationally angry
>Remember, math is a human attempt at language which formally describes the observable universe.
bullshit.
not an argument.
It's like astrology
I think math exists because everything exists, but only in universes that coincidentally follow math do sentient life forms evolve to contemplate its existence. Like the rain drops in a puddle that ask why the hole in their ground in which they reside is so perfectly shaped to hold them
Except it is the reason, had you actually read my post you'd understand. The number sequence has existed longer than our understanding of the phi ratio, and I never said it's relation to phi is insignificant at all. The Fibonacci sequence is literally defined as the sequence of numbers starting on one where each number is the sum of the two before it, as created by Leonardo Pisano Bigollo.
Well there's no definite answer to this, and there's certainly no short answer, but here goes.
if the universe is like a landscape, then physics is like a map of that landscape. A representation, if you like. And math is like the grid on the map.
The map makes no sense without the grid, and there's no reference or point in the grid without the map.
The whole point of math is that is is logically consistent. It represents logical systems. The universe is built on logical systems (even though we may not view them as "sensible"), so it makes sense that we can devise a logical description of them. We verify it through experiment. There's lots of math that is logically sound, but would make no sense in reality. And that's why physics is important. It determines which parts of math are suitable to approximate reality.
There also appears to be no root source of math, other than axioms and logic that follows from them. Bear in mind that all mathematics is based on axioms that are based on the universe in some way. But we can generalise them to make more complex theories.
All of you faux mathematic transcendentalists are fucking full of shit, and anyone who is actually well educated or naturally inclined to the study of math is laughing at you. Logic and math are intrinsically entwined, and to believe otherwise, or that there is anything to be learned from an illogical approach to math is foolish. If you need a better understanding of math I suggest you start with basic arithmetic and work your way up, no one before you has made a new discovery in the field by stabbing in the dark. There is a reason Numerology is separate from Mathematics.
>user completely misunderstands the question and misses the point
This is a philosophical question it's not even about the contents of math.
>user completely misses the thread
I'm addressing the whole, not the op
Mathematics is the study of relations and patterns. It is no surprise then that when you apply it to things you find lots of patterns & relations in the universe - everything's a nail when you've got a hammer etc.
Math isn't "the universe", it's an entirely manmade construction and people who think otherwise need to get their head out of their arse with these self-aggrandising, ridiculous notions that we have discovered the source code of the universe and all that BS. It is just a set of rules that allow for emergent phenomena, that doesnt make it special.
This is basically just another form of the anthropic principle, you would all laugh at the notion of the universe being tailor made for us alone - we are not special and neither is our math. Similarly the reason it seems to explain things in the universe well is because if it didnt it would be discarded as incorrect mathematics/physics. Hell we can't even solve 3 body problems or the majority of fluid mechanics analytically and you want to tell me math is the backbone of the universe??
>in b4 quote of the last paragraph followed by "not yet..."
Math is not special and you've made yourself a fool.
That's not what he's saying user... He's not mistaking the map for the territory due to physics and such as your post is based on
He's saying that, and I am expanding upon his ideas, that since aliens would have the same math as us when you ignore the symbols and organization of topics, that it must "exist" somewhere in the ether. And where is it? That is the question
You're just reiterating what I've said, halfwit
brainlet no brakes
>the Universe is written in a language, Math. The Universe is written in that code...everything is numbers
That's not how that reads at all.
Going through his whole post
>Why is it true
Only the bits that are true are true.
>Why does it make sense
See above
>orderly
Pure math - you're building from predefined logical rules and determine further ones from them. Applied math - you are imposing order on the universe and seeing what sticks. Moreover you think it is ordered because that's what you've been brought up to believe about math. If you've ever studied anything to do with chaos you'll see tons of math where you basically end up with loads of resonances etc that kill solutions to systems making them intractable. Likewise research based maths is very scrappy, and its only after considerable revision or reformulation by others that in can come out (occasionally) looking elegant.
>Physics can exist because Math exists
This one's by the bye but Physics is an attempt to understand the how (and sometimes the why though people now try and avoid ontological arguments) of the universe. If math didnt exist - physicists would be using the other best tool and mathematicians would involve themselves with another logical play set.
>why does Math exist at all?
It exists because we invented it .
> what exactly is the main trunk?
As a physics grad im largely in favour of all things stemming from a single root but that doesnt necessarily mean there is - though I think work is being done in topology to try and unify maths.
>simple, initial thing
the natural numbers, pattern recognition, abstract thought, combinatorics etc.
Tl;dr : Math exists because we made it and that is why it makes sense to us.
Oh and to reply to your masg directly
> aliens would have the same math as us
This is not necessarily true at all, aliens may not think like us at all. They may have no need for grouping things and hence need a way to categorise and therefore generate relations between things. Aliens don't have to be remotely anthropomorphic (terra-pomorphic?).
Now if we expect the majority of life to begin through replicating chemicals inducing a competitive 'evolutionary' pressure then we would expect aliens to have a concept of self and grouping things to determine resources, enemies, etc. Then we should expect that we can communicate with them, most easily though math. This is a case of our technology being derived from our way of thinking though and so if aliens have simliar (but different levels of advaced) tech then they would already have a similar thought process to us
How would aliens not have a concept of addition? How would aliens not have a concept of multiplication?
How would aliens not have a concept of primes?
These are all geometrically reflected in the nature of physical matter in the universe.
>Addition = putting more things on the end of a row of things
>Multiplication = taking a row of things and adding more things below each row to make it have a certain number of columns
>Primes = quantities where lines are capable of being arranged into a box with multiple rows and columns
If they have these concepts the rest naturally follow. I think you're being disingenuous saying aliens wouldn't have the same math as us. If they have concepts of bartering and trade they necessarily would develop this. If they are intelligent, they would develop this.
If Edgar Cayce were alive he'd say something like that math is a construct of the divine as it becomes realized in the physical plane, builded by the consciousness of the elemental forces in the Universe coming into closer unison with the Creator, or as he often calls it, the "First Clause." He said that to begin to imagine the Pythagorean Theorem is to understand God in a sense.
>Quote from Aristotle: ... "[the Pythagoreans] saw that the ... ratios of musical scales were expressible in numbers [and that] .. all things seemed to be modelled on numbers, and numbers seemed to be the first things in the whole of nature, they supposed the elements of number to be the elements of all things, and the whole heaven to be a musical scale and a number."
>The Pythagoreans also used music to heal the body and to elevate the soul, believing that earthly music was '...a faint echo of the universal harmony of the spheres...'
Funny enough, Cayce frequently says music is how you can attune with the infinite, and even more frequently refers to this "music of the spheres." Keep in mind, Pythagoras claimed to have knowledge of five of his past-lives so he was OP when it comes to understanding math, physics, and philosophy.
baanpu
Essentially prime numbers are also '1' or as you can call it 'return to sender', to be treated as unique or 'indivisible unit of a set'. In all reality in order for 'communication' to exist we must all be part of a greater 'divisible set' and for it to be traversible we all care about 'from instantiation of infinity to now'. So, for two people (or N people) to communicate you require only 3 items. Identity is private indivisible, Evaluation is shared divisible, the other is private divisible (optional).
This is the first 1=0+1 -> Yes however you need to start with teh bottom power divisor of the set, otherwise you could just multiplicatively/exponentially etc. (basically ou need a 'non-power' operator for maths to know you are dealing with the smallest possible unit).
1 is 'identity' in truth. It just means 'the number the following system/sequence agrees on, to the exclusion of every other number'. 1 requires 0 compute power, everything else does. That's maths. 1 is the closest part to 0/Infinity you can be, so when you want to check if you are 'traversable fully' from 0 to your desired destination then your pattern would need, somehow, to have a 'return point' to verify.
1 and 3 are essentially the same in that they are 'prime examples of a rule', so you can count 3 as both 1 OR 3 (as the start of computer/problem space or not).
Math, in a way, is just another human language or just another way humans try to describe the reality that they are perceiving. It does not reflect reality, just our limited understanding of it.
Mathematics is a representation of physical properties as we perceive them, derived and quantified through experimentation
Math is a specific type of logic (or rather, several types). Logic exists because the universe makes sense.
Logic is nothing but a map of possibilities, that take specific shapes. It is a consequence of an universe that exists.
>what exactly is the main trunk?
foundations
You would have said you wish you were born in 1950 if you were born in 1900.