If there is no God, how to explain mathematics?

[_Robert_]

This is an interesting topic that unseen has started and it has been debated for ages…

“The uniform character of mathematics is the essence of science, for mathematics is the foundation of all exact scientific knowledge.” David Hilbert, 1862 – 1943

“Geometry is one and eternal shining in the mind of God. That men share in it is among the reasons that Man is the image of God.” Johannes Kepler, 1571 – 1630 Mathematician and Astronomer

“Mathematics is the language in which the gods speak to people. ”Plato, c. 427 BC – c. 347 BC Mathematician and Philosopher

“Actually, everything that can be known has a number; for it is impossible to grasp anything with the mind or to recognize it without this.” Philolaus, c. 470 – c. 385 BC Scientist and Philosopher

“There may be babblers, wholly ignorant of mathematics, who dare to condemn my hypothesis, upon the authority of some part of the Bible twisted to suit their purpose. I value them not, and scorn their unfounded judgment.”Nicolaus Copernicus, 1473 – 1543, Mathematician and Astronomer

What exactly is mathematics? Many have tried but nobody has really succeeded in defining mathematics; it is always something else. Roughly speaking, people know that it deals with numbers, figures, with relations, operations, and that its formal procedures involving axioms, proofs, lemmas, theorems have not changed since the time of Archimedes.”Stan Ulam, 1909 – 1984 Mathematician

So I remain unsure about all of this. For example, there is no such thing as a square in nature. Or is there? I mean a square has only two dimensions. Even the thinnest square cutout that is one molecule thick is a cube. The universe is not 2-D.  The face of a cube is a square. A square is a “property” of a cube.

The universe seems to have “rules”.  Are these “rules” just a model?

I dunno. The god of Abraham, if he was real…coulda had a lot more believers if he would have just explained a few things, that’s for sure.

 

[jakelafort]

Yeah Robert is has been apparent for centuries that math is in the fabric of the universe and or its contents.  But like Davis points out, and in a sense Plato with his allegory of the cave; our purview is so narrow and limited that it may be unfair or biased to make sweeping claims about the nature of the universe or its universality.

While you are citing various thinkers howz bout Einstein’s,  “god don’t play dice with the universe?”

He refused to accept that quantum mechanics is a departure from the mathematical universe he believed in.

[tom sarbeck]

Mathematics has no need for anything physical.*(see below)

That people use it to model physical phenomena gives them the burden of proof: Can they rely on their model, and if so how far?

Atheists who allow anything metaphysical into the discussion aren’t paying attention.

Philosophers who haven’t studied the universe are unwise to take part in the discussion.

——————-

* An applied mathematician’s toast: Here’s to pure mathematics; may it never be of use to anyone.

 

[jakelafort]

Whether deciphering the math that describes physical phenomena or using math as a concept or tool it always requires something physical.  To assert otherwise is to engage in metaphysical nonsense.

[Unseen]

tom sarbeck wrote:

Unseen, adding 112 and 545 in octal or hex is also a snap. No column adds to more than 7 so none requires a carry.

I did set up the addition to be easy for mere mortals in decimal, but I don’t find the same problem easy for ME in binary or hex (or octal). But I don’t work with them much (at all).

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by Unseen.

[PopeBeanie]

Wait, I got it… mathematics is the soul of reality!

[Simon Paynton]

“using math as a concept or tool it always requires something physical”

– it doesn’t require anything physical, it just requires logical entities such as for example points, straight lines, and planes, numbers, angles etc.

[PopeBeanie]

Unseen wrote:

I did set up the addition to be easy for mere mortals in decimal, but I don’t find the same problem easy for ME in binary or hex (or octal). But I don’t work with them much (at all).

Two keys here, one is that it does depend on what you’ve learned, but on the other hand binary would be a pain just for the number of characters one would have to write out, even for small numbers.

Speaking of 112 and 545, the hardest part would be first converting them to (say) hex. Octal and hex are rather reasonable mathematically because they’re powers of two.

112 = hex 70 (kind of easy because 112 decimal is merely 7 x 16); 545 = hex 221.

Simply,

• hex 221 + 70 = 291 (but this case is easy because there’s nothing to carry)
• hex 221 + 80 = 2a1, and still easy, because there’s nothing to carry

I wasn’t showing off my love for hex, but if one got used to it instead of decimal, they would be having to write out less digits, and therefore having to deal with less carries, so practically, it’s less work than decimal. But also, I imagine that base 10 somehow seems to have a magic of its own to some of us, but it’s only because of habit.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by PopeBeanie.
• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by PopeBeanie. Reason: math errors, of course!

[jakelafort]

Simon, your list is not physical?

How can any of those exist outside of the realm of the physical?

[PopeBeanie]

Davis wrote:

There is no math inside the fabric of the universe.

I think that’s an oversimplification. It’s true that the symbology is man-made, but in the list of examples you gave to support the idea that there’s no “math” in them, I’d reword it: Mathematical relationships exist in the universe. Like in the video Unseen linked us too, there is a harmony (i.e. a physical pattern) to how the planets ended up in their current orbits.

Here’s another example more related to brain science, and this is not just about anthropomorphism… a lot of bird song (for example) uses notes on a scale that are predictably mathematically related to each other, similar to how we prefer certain combinations of pitches. Sure, “music” is a construct, and even birdsong is a construct, but those combinations of pitches work because they’re physically, mathematically the easiest tonal combinations for brains to process and recognize. Harmony sounds nice because it features salient mathematical relationships. Oppositely, some sounds sound awful, because they feature mathematical incoherence. A screech generally has no mathematical harmony in it.

Sans anthropic brains, just remember that even wind and a cave can naturally create harmonious sounds.

[Simon Paynton]

@jakelafort – as Robert said, they’re Platonic forms, they don’t exist in real life.  They exist in the realm of the logical imagination.

[jakelafort]

Even so  Simon they are produced by the very physical aspects of our brain.  And when they are manifest in being put pencil to paper they are physical and when they exist actively or in short or long term memory they are physical. Without a physical constituent to conceive or retain they are absent.

[jakelafort]

I think what Pope says about bird song is also true of whale’s some of whom sing for days on end.

Not sure how it plays into the issue(s) but there are synesthetes who have consistent associations with particular numbers.

[Unseen]

PopeBeanie wrote:

Davis wrote:

There is no math inside the fabric of the universe.

I think that’s an oversimplification.

It’s also false. “Originally defined as the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter, [pi] now has various equivalent definitions and appears in many formulas in all areas of mathematics and physics.” It’s so ingrained in nature that it even shows up away from geometry, in probability theory, for example. If it’s not a natural phenomenon, what is it? And how could any technological civilization get along without it?

[tom sarbeck]

Sheeesh, all this because Georges LeMaitre wanted to support Genesis and fancied that he did it when he used the “anomaly” PART of what Edwin Hubble said.

I understand that two decades later he asked the Pope to stop bragging.

 

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by tom sarbeck. Reason: added “the anommaly”

[Author]

Posts