That's not accurate. You can use a spherical interpretation for air travel, the standard for construction, and a Poincare perspective for parts of marine biology.
Does all of math, even the most abstract, have a physical analog...
Cooper Morris
Thomas Miller
i know them, and i have worked through that very book
this is a meta-mathematical point in any case
Henry Walker
>in some way
Yes, everything you can possibly imagine is in "some way" related to the physical universe. Math related or not.
Henry Brown
So, why do you have a problem with the Axiom of Choice? It's necessity comes naturally and it is consistent. How is it a cop out?
Dominic Ward
it's an abomination. a tasteful set of axioms should be self-evident. axiom of choice isn't. not that zf was tasteful to begin with.
Asher Cruz
Yes, yes, you can find examples where all have applications. Maybe I should have picked a better example.
How about en.wikipedia.org
It would be nice to know it but I can't imagine there's a Skewes' number of anything in the material universe.
Math is undeniably useful but not everything has a physical analog. Which doesn't mean that math which doesn't have a physical interpretation is necessarily any less important.
James Lewis
What system has a nice set of axioms in your opinion?
Jeremiah Taylor
Wildberger's Math Foundations
William Hughes
there is no fucking way the Banach-Tarski paradox could happen is because the cardinality of units of matter, like particles, cant go above countably infinite.
Jason Sullivan
>Assumes a Euclidean proof for a nonphysical reality based on pure logic will apply to a physical reality based on different logic