4 ms·
My understanding is that the reason math is considered unpatentable is that mathematical statements are considered facts. This is somewhat motivated by a "reli
by betterunix2 9y ago
My understanding is that the reason math is considered unpatentable is that mathematical statements are considered facts. This is somewhat motivated by a "religious" idea that math is discovered; there is a very ancient philosophical debate about math as a "discovery" versus as an "invention." I am squarely on the "discovery" side, but there is a legitimate question of "where" the math is prior to its being "discovered." It is kind of hard to think about "discovering" something by applying your imagination; of course, "inventing" math is a bit odd as well since truth cannot be "invented."
Anyhow, glad we agree :)
- dahart 9y agoYeah, math might have been considered facts. But now we know better, now our improved understanding is showing that software and math are two different representations of the same thing. > there is a very ancient philosophical debate about math as a "discovery" versus as an "invention." Yes, and it's a super interesting idea & debate too. Not to get too far off topic, but I'm a little bit more of a mind that representations are invented, while many fundamental truths are discovered (and can only be expressed through representation). One math example that for me relates to software just a tiny bit, and illustrates why this is a debate is the 0^0 problem. We've mostly figured out how to better classify and represent that, but not before having big arguments where smart people say 1 and other smart people say 0. Mathematicians and programmers have mostly picked a convention, even though both answers are right depending on context. I would call that picking of a convention part of the "invention" side of math, as is calling it indeterminate. But yeah, agreed, invention and discovery are both weird and problematic when you talk about math.