I'm sorry, I don't follow. — Agent Smith

Look at your favorite coffee mug, now describe it. You use words to describe right? Did it have the properties you used before you described it or did they come into being when you did it? Now imagine try to describe something without the words to do it. Impossible right?

That is what math does. Describes the properties of things using numbers instead of words.

If universe is non- mathematical, how does this impact status of applied math? — ucarr

Mankind will have to find another way to describe the universe and they will chuck applied math out of the window as obsolete.

Do you know you're entangling mental objects with physical objects? I suspect your premise here is rooted in subjective materialism. — ucarr

Do you think that math cannot be applied to non material objects. I had two dreams last night and three the day before.

Holy shit!!! Non material things are mathematical as well. OR NOT.

I suspect you have no idea how to continue proving your point so you are trying to confuse the topic.

Are you okay with science reverted back to the period before the scientific method? — ucarr

Apart from the fact that it is a bloody stupid question, how do you think my answer would help you to prove that the universe is mathematical?

You are the one that has stated that mathematics was clearly a part of the universe before humans existed, therefore the universe is mathematical. Exactly what proof have you offered?

but the universe was/had to be mathematical before we learned how to describe it, no? — Agent Smith

No, it was only describable. Then math was invented to help describe it.

Well, what about cosmology - the Big Bang Theory for example? Scientists project backwards from the knowns of the present - speed of expansion of the universe (accelerating), estimates of mass of the universe, etc. - and they find that the universe must've begun 13.8 billion years ago. Then they searched for corroborative evidence and found it as cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). All these projections into the past are mathematical in nature. In other words, given humans are only a 300k year old species, it follows that the universe was mathematical way before humans came into existence. — Agent Smith

Yes they do just that. They have invented a language that describes the universe in its current state and they use that to. Then they use the same language to look for evidence of it being true. From that it follows that it has only been possible for humans to describe it for a few years.

You can do the same with a couple of photos of someone that were taken a few years apart, you can guess what they looked like in the past and what they will look like in the future. Then go and look for pictures of them in the past to see if you were right or hang around for a few years to see if they change the way you predicate.

Something about material things makes them countable.

Mind you, the language that does the counting, math, does not make material things countable.

Being countable is part of the makeup, part of the being of material things. — ucarr

Could that something that makes them countable be their presence? Based on the idea that you cannot count things that are not there to be counted, maybe this is so.
I can count my ideas about how to solve a problem, I can count sheep on the field or in my mind, I can even count how many times you have failed to provide any detailed proof to back up your way of thinking. But I find it incredibly hard to count nothing. You try it, how many diphthongs are in the following paragraph?



How many did you find? None I guess.
You did not find any because there were none to find, If I had written any there they would have been easy to find.
The logical conclusion is that what makes objects countable is simple their presence.

We suspect that these as yet uncountable things will eventually become countable, when their mathematical expression gets resolved, but the fact of their being countable prior to math being able to actually do the counting makes it logically clear that math does not impart countability to these material things, otherwise we would not struggle to count them. Instead, all we would have to do is create some math that imparts countability to these things and then they would be countable.

We both know that's not how the world works. — ucarr

I don't know who we are but maybe you are right, or not. Who knows, mankind might be extinct before the can invent languages complicated enough to describe the rest of the universe.

The reason is more likely that most of the universe has no mathematical structure. Already three bodies interacting gravitationally do not move on mathematically well-defined ways, unless specific boundary conditions are fulfilled. So a mathematical universe is a fiction, a myth. — EugeneW

Thank you. At least someone else understands that math is just another language used to describe the universe. :100: :party:

therefore, per your stipulation, acknowledge that humans put numbers onto material objects to describe what was already there before they developed the writing of numbers? — ucarr

Yes, just as they put colors, shapes and lots of other stuff.

Since you've made this statement, do you acknowledge that material things are countable? — ucarr

Of course they are, did I not make it clear enough that was the reason for inventing numbers.

Could something be described fluxmatically if math has not been invented? Could something be described noxmixically if math has not been invented? Could something be described (fill in the blank with your own word) if math has not been invented? Could something be described... — ucarr

Oh dear, you do go on a bit don't you. And you are good at invent gobbledygook. Humans need to describe things, they will always find a way to do so. A river gets deeper one day and some measures it at 5 meters, the next day someone else measures it a 17 feet. Did the level rise or lower? Metric and standard are two methods of measuring, but both describe the depth of the river. There are many examples of measuring systems for anything that can be measured. And they have all been invent by humans.

Numbers have always existed, 3.1415929... being one of the worst ever imagined. Then [but until] someone invented a method of naming them. Now it has the illustrious name of Pi. Could it be possible that the same has happened to colors? — ucarr

Would we even know about Pi if someone had not invented a method to work it out and describe it? The same goes for black holes, they say that they have always been there, but until recently they have invent the mathematical equations to more or less prove their existence.

Since you have made the above statement, do you think if follows that the universe, which pre-dates human math, has always been describable via the language of math? — ucarr

I suppose it has, and I know that is the only method of doing so that humans have discovered. But I cannot be sure whether other methods exist or not, and neither can you. All we know is what the science department has told us.

Do you agree that from this it follows that math expresses its form and content in connection with the form and content of the universe? — ucarr

That is what humans made it for, it would not exist still if it did not work to some extent.

Do you agree that when you talk of math striving to fit reality, and sometimes failing, you imply that math fails in its core mission when it doesn't fit reality? — ucarr

If math was perfect why did it take so long and have so many theories thrown out or overturned by new theories? If the math had been there all along why does it need to change. The simple reason is that while the universe is describable mathematically humans have still not figured out all of the math necessary to do the job and are still working on invent new ideas and methods to do so.

I have asked you if you would give 2-stone and 3-stone the same number. Are you unwilling to answer this question? — ucarr

I honestly thought you were joking when you asked such a ridiculous question. But I think that you yourself answered it when you called both of them piles of stones. Same name would even fit 20-stone.

Right in that the mathematical laws of nature preexisted humans — Agent Smith

How could they exist if math had not been invented. The universe exist before humans did, and humans wanted to describe it. So they invented the names of colors, shapes, sizes and many other characteristics that objects have. Mathematical laws are made by mankind to do that job, describe. They are nothing more than a specialized language.
Math is the human's way of describing the universe's characteristics as well but they had to do a lot of trying to get the formulas to fit the reality. And they have still a very long way to go and a lot of methods to invent to get to the end.
We humans believe that it must be a universal way of describing things, even going to the extent of send mathematical messages into space in the hope that beings from other worlds will understand the concepts. Maybe they will but there is always the possibility that they have other methods of doing it.

Read my reply. :cool: :smirk:

Do you acknowledge that the numbers we put onto material objects describe what was already there before human started writing numbers? — ucarr

If you acknowledge that humans spoke the numbers for thousands of years before they wrote then yes, I can do that.
But that just means that numbers were invented for counting before writing was invented for accounting. It in no way shows that numbers are part of the articles they describe.

Sorry for butting in, but the universe was behaving in a mathematical way (physics + chemistry) long before humans (biology) even entered the fray so to speak. I dunno, just saying. — Agent Smith

Actually, you are right and wrong. Could something be described mathematically if math has not been invented?
Colors have always existed, drab brown being one of the worst ever imagined. But until someone invented a method of naming them. Now it has the illustrious name of Pantone 448 C. Could it be possible that the same has happened to numbers?
We now use math to describe the universe, but we had to invent the math(numbers and equations) to explain it, to make the calculations fit reality. And a lot of explanations turn out to be wrong.

I'm incredibly overworked and came here to decompress and now I want to offer my services to write an algorithm to prevent morons from posting just because I'm so sad right now. — SkyLeach

Think you are too late mate, they are all around us. They come talking sweetly and seduce the minds of the smart and brave so that they become blathering idiots. Don't trust anyone, anyone of the posters here might suck up your intellect. :wink:

Pile of 2-stones sits on a red square. Close by, pile of 3-stones sits on a green square.

Seeing pile-of-2-stones and pile-of-3-stones, would you give each pile the same label? — ucarr

I doubt that many would call two or three stones a pile, but who knows. The same applies here as I said above, if the piles of stones already had a label there would be no need to give them one. Nothing has numbers as part of their make up, numbers were invented by man so that he could work out how the universe works.

If it were discovered that Germany has already established Fluxmax-stones = 3-stones, would the equation 2-stones = Fluxmax-stones have to be changed to 2-stones ≠ Fluxmax-stones? — ucarr

That is sort of like asking if the cowshit you found was discovered to come from a bull would we have to call it NOT COWSHIT.
No, we would just call it bullshit.

And of course we see numbers everywhere, we put them there.

There's a stone sitting on a red square. Close by, there's a stone sitting on a green square. A person sees them and gives them a label. Label = 2-stones. — ucarr

Giving them a label is the key there, if the number label where part of the stone no one will need to "give" them anything

Do you think 2-stones can be replaced with Fluxmax-stones and would make no difference? — ucarr

Of course it could be replaced with anything, as long as it is universally accepted. Fluxmax-stones could quite easily be 2-stones in some sort of technical language.

Whatever they are called is because of human constructed language, not because of stones having built in numbers.

Ever read a biology book? — ucarr

Yes.

You've been debating me about pure math & how it's uncoupled from the material world — ucarr

No, I cannot remember even mentioning it. We were discussing the materialistic qualities of numbers, which is no existent.

Human concepts are based on observations of surrounding natural forms. — ucarr

Which natural forms are the base for books? On which natural form is animal training based?

And how does this all intertwine with the OP?

Concept - Philosophy - an idea or mental picture of a group or class of objects formed by combining all their aspects. -- The Apple Dictionary — ucarr

But it is not always necessary to have physical representations.

Consider a) Mental representations of material objects; b) material representations of concepts

Which comes first? — ucarr

I would think that it would be impossible to have a man made physical object without there being a concept on which to base it.
But it would be impossible to form a concept of something natural without having at least some of the characteristics being known.

I'm saying that number symbols refer to & derive meaning from material things whose set of attributes includes one particular attribute I call number. All of this verbiage is an attempt to say material objects are numericalizable because they have a built-in property of being movable, which is to say, positionable. — ucarr

645,798,845,635,345,665,332,313,464,655,876,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

If numbers derive meaning from material things, then the number above either has no meaning or a meaning that is unknown. Which do you think it is.

Numbers do not represent objects they specify the quantity of objects, the length of object, the weight of objects. But not the objects themselves.

If I remember Battleship correctly, there is a plastic platform full of holes, the grid where a player's battleship moves to various positions. — ucarr

Before that was invented we used to play on 2 pieces of paper. Draw lines with a pencil to form a grid, letters on the top numbers down the side. But they decided to make easier and dumb down the people. But they both are only physical representations of concepts. The location C12 is not a physical thing, ask any kid that learns about map coordinates or Excel in school.

Yes, number symbols & words are signs that refer to material things. — ucarr

Could you then please indicate to me where I can appreciate a nice looking number 69. I doubt that you can.


This is the image of a Greek road sign. Is it a physical number? No, it is only the paint on a piece of metal that has been manipulated so at to form what is commonly accepted as the visual representations of the numbers 6 and 9. The paint is physical, the metal is physical but the idea is still an abstract.

Numbers do not refer to physical things either, they refer to the quantity(another abstract) of physical objects.

Are you saying the positional grid, a material thing, possesses the property of number? — ucarr

The positional grid is not a material thing, it is an abstract. And numbers are also abstract ideas that have physical representations or icons so that dumb people like most of us can use the concepts.

Just like an word does, they represent ideas. Writing words and numbers down does not make them physical objects, it just makes it easier to transmit ideas.
Try playing telegraph with a few friends using a complicated idea, see if the idea can be passed on accurately.

Material Numbers – because a material object can hold a position, perhaps we can understand that any material object has a built-in property of number. The number property of a material object is its ability to afford a slot wherein a set of possible numbers gives value to its position within an array of other material objects in interrelationship. — ucarr

Did you ever play battleship? The numbers are part of the positional grid, not properties of the object.

RIP Gary Brooker

I hadn't noticed before "Flying high in the sky" instead of "Blotted out from the sky" which, beside Mick's clear vocal, makes more sense. "Mistake?" Maybe ... — 180 Proof

Yep, that's the one I heard and saw. Maybe Mick's voice is the reason for it, but you can find the lyrics all over the internet.

Did you notice the mistake in the video?

But we've just established that at a certain speed only distance is metered. So if there isn't much traffic, a taxi driver can increase his daily income if he speeds to get more fares for the day. — Nils Loc

Agreed, but this would then depend on variables such as final location, route taken, distance from starting point, time of day. It would not be standard set of variables for each customer.

There would also be limits imposed in some places on speed of vehicles. I don't know if it is still true but the cab company my mother worked for had speed regulators on all of their cars, many companies had them.

But one thing that is almost always true, the cabby is not going to lose money. He just has to find a way to maximize the number of trips he makes.

I am not a hundred percent sure about the way you describe the idea, but it sounds like an idea I read in a science fiction series some years ago. I think it was called "Dire Earth".

You havden't done your homework — Agent Smith

and you did not read the article.

That's why you're objecting to the claim that it's a paradox. — Agent Smith

That is why you are claiming it is a paradox.

Taxi fare is not calculated by the drivers hurrying to reach the destination because if he goes to fast the customers are in the cab only a short time and pay less. It would not make sense for him to do so.

Don't bother to answer. :smirk:

Just google it! — Agent Smith

I already did that, and provided a link to the information.

If you cannot do the same, then I think that you have no case to fight and that the discussion has ended.

I bet they are not happy when someone has a heart attack in those pranks.

I did my own investigations into the matter - distance it is, not time. — Agent Smith

Show me where you found this.

Does it make sense for the payer's calculations to be based on distance while the payee's is based on time? — Agent Smith

But both amounts are calculated using the same method, so this cannot be true.
The payer's bill is calculated on the amount of time it takes the payee to travel the distance, he is not paying just for the distance traveled.

As I said before the two just appear to be different because of point of view, there is no paradox there.

It seems that the word "paradox" has a much broader definition than just contradictions. — Agent Smith

Yes, some people use it to describe things that don't make sense. But I cannot think of how to justify its use here. Can you?

Even so, the taxi fare: is it for distance or is it for time?

Both?
Distance = speed×time — Agent Smith

It is explained more or less in the article I posted a link to. Both count.

If a taxi driver covers 2 miles in 5 minutes he might earn less than if he made the same journey in 6 minutes. That would balance out if he could make more trips. It would all depend on the setup of the meter.

Doesn't look good on the resume. — Paine

Do you think politicians really care about things like that? :wink:

However, the meter's calculations are still based on how far the taxi would've travelled at some predefined speed. — Agent Smith

So you do not have a paradox. At least not the one you stated.

Neither part actually contradicts the other.

I suppose having a green thumb from the experience is unlikely in either event. — Paine

Brown maybe!! :lol:

Politicians are famous for having their thumbs in many pies and for having that in places where the sun never shines.

You pay for distance, but the cabbie charges you for (his/her) time. — Agent Smith

You pay to be taken somewhere. Taxi meters are not calibrated just to take into account the distance traveled, but the time is also taken into account. Have you never noticed that if you ask a cab to wait for you for a few minutes the meter keeps on ticking?

If he takes longer than expected the bill would go up, if he goes to fast the bill for the same distance would be less.

https://auto.howstuffworks.com/taxi-meter1.htm

What's a paradox for you? — Agent Smith

The same as it is for most people I suppose.
A statement starting with something apparently true that leads to counterintuitive or unacceptable conclusions.

Your statement is just a description of what happens sometimes.

The paradox: The passengers pays for distance traveled, the cabby drives as if you paid for his/her time. — Agent Smith

No paradox at all, just different points of view on what is happening.

What are user avatars at all if not that same thing, an icon, a little graphic, to represent you? — Pfhorrest

Ain't that the truth mate.

But what does mine say about me?