A... huge post. No worries if -no one- gets through it. ^^;

[nerdraeg]

All right, so the past few days for me have been the epitome of nifty; and not just for the Holiday. The aftermath was also excellent, and continues to be, with all credit going to the people who made it so. I promise I’ll write a huge, doting entry on it soon enough (for… my own satisfaction, as I’m sure no one needs any more of my Super Sized

Comments

[heerojf]

A plant can be green. That symbolizes science.

The act of actually saying "this plant is green", that is mathematics.

To a degree, I'm saying what you were also suggesting: math is a language used to describe the world around us, i.e. to describe science, which IS the world around us.

However, I don't consider math a mere tool slightly more useful than a bunsen burner. Because I strongly believe that math can explain everything in science. Even chaos theory. If a neural signal is nearly a synapse, about to make its jump, which receptor it's going to anchor onto could be calculated based on its angle and velocity of approach. Nobody's going to bother to do that, of course, but that's the essence of chaos theory: it's mathematical calculations too convoluted for our human minds to wrap around all the variables involved. But the point is that it's technically possible to explain everything with math even if it's too complicated to warrant the effort

[nerdraeg]

Mm, firstly, I’m very sorry you took that line too seriously; it was meant to add a bit of humor, only. Math is the most important tool of science, in my estimation, second to perhaps sheer curiosity.

It becomes an interesting conundrum at this point, if we agree that math is, in essence, a implement devised by people for means of explaining science to themselves, and yet, to then still be able to assume (and dare I say, agree) that there are principles that can be explained by math, but are beyond the outer limits of our understanding. (Also, thank you for the wonderful example using chaos theory. I admit, I do not have the most well-informed approach to that subject, and it gave me clarification as well as food for thought.)

I think you have stated this all beautifully, and I’m very grateful for such well-thought out feedback. :) I have surprisingly little to add to what I was very much trying to get across, case and point, on my own.

[heerojf]

Oh don't worry! I was in no way offended by the comment. I knew you were using it as an amusing example. And to that effect, I have nothing against bunsen burners the world over

[nerdraeg]

I believe this is where science begins to skirt 'faith'. Is there really nothing in this world, whatever 'this' world is... (and it's been a long standing theory of mine that we are merely the protons of our earthly atom, in a sea of atoms, makeup of some much larger creature... XD Sci-Fi Channel, here I come?)... that cannot, if one was given the right tools of deduction... be entirely predicted? What about the very forces that run these equations, that 'made' them 'truth'? Or, is anyone so capable of riddling out and fathoming every asset of science a 'true God', capable of chaos theory... or... are they just as bound, and made helpless by these laws?

A few random ruminations of my own. I -did- leave this open, as a forum, to -anybody-, yourself included. So, your own self willing, and time permitting for you, if you have your own thoughts and feel the bustle to share them-- please, in this case, do not feel the need to hesitate. If you "have a whole lot to say", you are welcome to. I don't mind the clutter.

[heerojf]

Ah yes we are indeed skirting theology more and more. Regardless of whether it's believable or not, here's a theory of mine I'm not sure I ever shared: I regard the concept of any "universal omnipotent being" as the "ultimate poolshark". The one who nudged the ball of universal matter with his pool cue juuust right, causing the big bang in such a way as to make the entire universe unravel the way he wanted it, from the biggest supernova interstellar events, to those two neurones that clashed in your brain this morning causing you to decide to have cinnamon toast crunch

[nerdraeg]

Also; if we concur that science is ‘the plant being green’, it is sufficient to conclude, then, that mathematics is not technically a fundamental part of science in its ‘pure’ form (of the plant simply being green) any more then English is? I can tell you the plant is viridian, or ‘say so’ with mathematics, but the true point of its being so is the science itself. So then would I be correct, in your judgment, in saying that mathematics, even our ability to conduct it, is a science, more then the act of simply ‘being’ is mathematic, even if the concepts of the subject are innate

[heerojf]

If a tree falls and no one to hear it, does it make a sound

[nerdraeg]

Noted and seconded.

[heerojf]

Long time no talk Cariel! How've you been? Beware Lojban. Once you started down its path, forever will it dominate your destiny.

[nerdraeg]

In my opinion, however humble? Yes. ...Or... does it? It certainly makes something, but who or what is there to define that something as sound? Does 'sound' indeed have a platform of existence if there is no one to reflect upon it, nothing capable of processing it? Is that what non-existence is? But then... science IS what ISN'T too, so I suppose, it cheats a bit to one-up mathematics. :) That crafty science and its voodoo magic! *Shakes Fist

[heerojf]

That was my conclusion as well: the crashing sound would exist even in the absence of sentient recognition of it. Analogously it's my opinion that science would exist even in the absence of math to help explain it.

I don't think I was negating any previous argument. The only thing I was contending was that math is a language so powerful that it can be used to describe anything in science. But the facts of science remain master of all. What good is it for me to say "the plant is green" if there is no plant?

Why does everything I say seems to harken back to The Matrix lately? o_o

Don't worry about agreeing to a point, even if it does bring discussions to a gradual end. At least it does so in a "wonder twins unite" kind of way.