Math is not a "science"

Proof:
>assume math is a science
>thus the board about science, including mathematics, would br called just "Science"
>we see in red letters above that the board is called "Science and Math" which is a contradiction
>this math is not a "science"

Mathfags btfo

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_science
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Math isn't a science, math is a tool for science

>math is a tool
U r a tool

Math is not a *natural* science.
Math is a *formal* science.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_science

[/thread]

Math it is a science, but it is the queen of science so it gets a special mention. Similarly, if I ever teach a general math class I would call it "Number Theory and math" where I would teach all common techniques for algebra, geometry and inequalities but focus problem solving in number theory because number theory is the queen of math.

this board is only for mathematics

Proof:
>mathematics is a science
>not all science is mathematics
>this board is for things that fulfill the logical conjunction of 'things that are science' and 'things that are math'
>therefore this board is only for math

qed and btfo soft scientists

you must have meant 'zfc set theory'

number theory is just about being able to divide random shit, it's not the queen of any maths other than those concerning themselves only with natural numbers

Every advancement in algebra from mere ideals to modern elliptic curves was made in order to prove Fermat. In other words, to do number theory. Ideals were invented by a guy thinking they were the key to Fermat. In the end it did not work out but poof, magically we had modern ring theory.

The natural numbers are the best number, and decoding their secrets is the most worthwhile thing a mathematician can do. ZFC is just a foundation, it is the toiler paper we use to wipe our ass. But number theory? Number theory is the reason we are taking a shit in the first place.

number theory is super interesting and has deep connections with algebraic geometry and complex analysis

this is like saying space travel is the foundation of classical mechanics

i dont doubt that it does, but i question the claim that it is the foundation to mathematics

kek
wonderful

he said queen not foundation tho
and it's probably the origin of most classical math anyway. algebra was invented to study Z

>this is like saying space travel is the foundation of classical mechanics
No it isn't. You are retarded at making analogies. Anyways, Gauss said number theory is the queen of math and no one would be retarded enough to contradict Gauss. But still, you are a fucking pleb.

>i question the claim that it is the foundation to mathematics

No one said number theory is the foundation of math you fucking retard.

That's stupid. It's like refering to numbers as "Integers and Reals".
The more adequate way, implying that math is a science, would be "math and other sciences"

i misinterpreted, my mistake- although my point still stands of its own accord

>It's like refering to numbers as "Integers and Reals
Nothing wrong with that. Integers are more important than the average real numbers. "Integers and Reals" sounds like an analytic number theory course where you use R-properties to prove Z-properties.

those "numbers" are still just abstract objects subject to a few operations whose codified behaviors correspond neatly to those naturally experienced in physical life

you can do mathematics on any sorts of such objects as long as the operations are well-formed and meaningful

Kek, your philosophy of math is 100% sterilized. I feel bad for you. I'm an agnostic but I am a "God made the integers, all the rest is the work of man" kind of guy. The integers are literally god given, the one gift this universe gave us and only us.

If you don't think there is something fantastical, almost mysthical, happening in Z then why are you even studying math?

no i get it that is pretty fun to pretend like youre gandalf casting division spells and summoning the ancient powers of induction but you'll have to hang up that wizard hat when you start looking for structure in other, unprescribed areas

besides- counting things and being and unbeing works the same in all universes, god-given or otherwise, and that's imo far more profound than rank mysticism

uauaueeua Thank you for that link mate. You're amazing. I hope you love yourself

While mathematics can be very useful, it's not a science. Science requires observation of the physical world, whereas mathematics operates outside this boundary, but can still be applied to observational reality.

Science merges the subjective experience of physical reality, with the objective nature of mathematics. The problem with a lot of science now is that it's become purely mathematical, because the theories it describes are not observable by us. It's essentially metaphysics at this point, something science was supposed to move away from.

This is why I don't believe theories like atoms, or gravity are correct, because they are not directly observable, the scientific method cannot be applied to them. They require faith, much like religion.

Am I really a certified sweetie?

Proof
>I don't like you and you are gay
>therefore math is not a science

>threading your own post
i bet you tried to suck your own dick at least once

Maths doesn't use science, sciences use maths. Non-mathfags btfo

whoa...so this is the power of deductive reasoning...

but classical mechanics was literally created for space travel (of planets)... Newton specifically created his laws to explain planetary motion

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_science
Fail 1: referring to Wikipedia as the one stop place for "knowledge".
Fail 2: not noticing that the entire introductory part is finished off with a [citation needed].
Fail 3: not noticing there are two more instances of [citation needed].
Fail 4: not noticing that the Talk page raises serious question that as a bonus fail, have not been addressed since they were raised in 2008. That is now close to 10 years ago.

And on top of that you /thread yourself!?

>referring to Wikipedia as the one stop place for "knowledge".

wow you're good at putting words into other people's mouths

>issues with Wikipedia article
>therefore subject matter doesn't exist

You're lying if you haven't

>referring to Wikipedia as the one stop place for "knowledge".

Uh... where was that stated? Can you point me to it?

Holy shit this is autism: the thread.

>math is a tool
This triggers the entire board