Why is maths the most useful thing in the world?

[K.I.L.E.R]

The ceoncept of mathematics is so simple.
Like I add 1 thing onto 2 more things I have 1 more thing than I did before.

Even vectors and crap like calculus modelling is so simple, but when you actually try to solve the model that's when hell breaks loose.

Relationships govern the universe, everything is related in some way, these relationships can be expressed mathematically but why is it so damn difficult to get answers?
It's not maths that's at fault, it's our knowledge of crap that's at fault, right?

 

[DemoCoder]

Dude, I've noticed that whenever you talk about math, you start rambling almost incomprehensiblly. No offense, but wait till you're sober.

 

[dizietsma]

Maths is not easy at all as it does not exist in real life. For instance describe to me what the number 3 is without using other numbers in your explanation.

Does infinity exist in the real world ?

Does zero ?

Does a minus something exist in the real world ?

 

[Sc4freak]

Indeed.

I agree with everything in this thread.

 

[Danalys]

mathematics is just the most specific descriptor of anything. negatives exist when you look at a part of a whole in isolation. they are just usefull for divying up stuff. like money. zero exists because i can ask someone to count the sheep in an empty field. again it's looking in isolation because the field stil has things in it just not sheep. infinity exists. the angles in a circle are one. minuses are dependant on where you start counting from. in the search for absolute zero we call it a minus temperature defined in a out of date but commenly used temperature scale. but i can not say i have minus 1 sheep in a field. unless i do it interms of the average sheep in other fields or something.

 

[Sc4freak]

Does infinite number of angles in a circle work, though? Infinity doesn't exist in real life - its a theoretical concept. If you can count so many angles in a circle that you reach infinity, then you aren't counting anything at all (you'd have to be counting by angles of 0 degrees).

 

[Danalys]

nope you'd be counting by infinitely small degrees. infinite numbers can exist thus inifinite scales can. it's just that we haven't got the time to count like that.

 

[Sc4freak]

Heh. Basically what you just said is:

Because infinity exists, we can have infinitesimally small numbers, and infinitely small scales. And because we have infinitesimally small numbers and infinitely small scales, therefore we can have infinity.

I maintain my belief that infinity and infinitesimally small numbers don't exist in real life. There are limits on how small you can go in this universe; infinitesimally small things don't exist. And since you can't have an infinitesimally small object, you can't have infinity. In the real world, that is. Of course, you could do this all on paper and prove that there are an infinite number of angles in a circle, but then that wouldn't be real world, would it?

 

[Danalys]

we have mathematical proof of inifine numbers tho and since number are what we define scales in terms of what i said was correct.

for another exampe if you draw a partial arc of a circle. and you say there aren't inifinities, to what accuracy could you measure the angle.

 

[Sc4freak]

As I said; that isn't real world. You can do this all on paper, prove that infinity exists or provide mathematical proof. But you can't split up a real circle into so many parts that the number of parts becomes infinite.

EDIT: And following your example, in the real world the maximum accuracy you could measure the angle would probably be down to sections the size of a planck length, which is 10^-35 meters or something silly like that. But that still isn't infinitesimal.

 

[Danalys]

ah but i moved on to a real world example. any angle you measure will only be as accurate as your measuring device. so in real world terms we don't have infinitly accurate measuring devices. but the angle is still a specific angle in a inifine number of possible angles. if i measure based on fractions. i can measure a 3rd as a 3rd. convert that into decimal and i get 1.3 recurring. but if measuring in decimal i'd get 1.333 or something depending on the scale. then the fraction would contain very long if not infinite numbers.

 

[Danalys]

As I said; that isn't real world. You can do this all on paper, prove that infinity exists or provide mathematical proof. But you can't split up a real circle into so many parts that the number of parts becomes infinite.

EDIT: And following your example, in the real world the maximum accuracy you could measure the angle would probably be down to sections the size of a planck length, which is 10^-35 meters or something silly like that. But that still isn't infinitesimal.

heh planck length deals with distance not angle. and an arc of planck length would lead to there being a cord of the arc that was shorter than planck length.

 

[Powderkeg]

Procreation is far more important than math.

 

[Danalys]

Procreation is far more important than math.

1/2 + 1/2 = 1

 

[Powderkeg]

1/2 + 1/2 = 1

Math is flawed.

 

[Danalys]

i thus modify to

x/2 + x/2 = x

 

[AlexV]

Math is great because it trains your mind(if done properly) to handle a shitload of things, but I don`t think we should be overly anal about it by going as far as saying it`s the greatest thing ever. Infinity as a concept points to some of maths inherent limitations:infinity is more or less a convention, it cannot be acurately reproduced, represented or anything similar IRL. We don`t really know if the Universe is infinite, because there are voices that tell that it`s continually expanding-so what`s bigger then infinity in order to allow such expansion?

Math is filled with conventions dictated by human preception of things, and if an universal language exists/an universal interpretative key, I`m not sure it`s math as seen by humans. But I do love math and I do find it entertaining, even though I think that going hoopla about it and not seeing it`s limitations is not a good thing.

 

[Danalys]

about the universe expanding thus not being infinite point. there is a difference between theoretical models of universes and the known universe from observation. in the first we can say the universe is infinite but the bits actually changing and doing stuff that we a theorising about are finite. the known universe is restricted by what has reached us to be infered about.