3 ms·

When I am riding a bike, I am very much thinking about physics, in order not to fall over and hurt myself. I can say that I have to think about physics regardle

When I am riding a bike, I am very much thinking about physics, in order not to fall over and hurt myself. I can say that I have to think about physics regardless of whether I am thinking of it in the terms Newton did, because the physical world exists without the theoretical framework to describe it. Mathematics on the other hand is purely theoretical. Unless I am engaging in mathematical reasoning, I'm not doing maths. That said, when I am musicking, I am doing mathematics all the time, at least for things like basic counting, arithmetic and logic. But that's true for so much of the basic activities we do every day that saying that music has a lot to do with maths becomes a pointless truism. Similarly, I may be doing maths when I'm cooking, but no one is going to try to tell me that "cooking is maths". Cooking has little to do with maths, but maths has a lot to do with everything.

slothtrop 7y ago
There's a difference between physics in abstract, more akin to math, and physics as intuitive assessment of your surroundings.
- boomlinde 7y ago
  What is the difference? It seems to me that in order to successfully predict how I should handle my bike when riding it not to fall over, I must be using an abstract model of physical reality that I draw conclusions from.
  - slothtrop 7y ago
    Approximating isn't the same as an abstract model, which uses glyphs and, well, math.
    - boomlinde 7y ago
      Glyphs have absolutely nothing to do with it, or do you propose that writing predates abstract thinking? I'd say that abstract thinking is a prerequisite for language. You can't communicate with others unless you can distill the physical world into abstract higher-order concepts. In doing so, you create an abstract model of the world. For example you may point and call that thing a bicycle. In reality, the concept of a bicycle is just a figment of your representational model that happens to roughly coincide with mine. Maybe an abstract model uses mathematics, but only necessarily in the sense that one could say that I'm using set theory to pick my nose. It's a bit like saying that watching TV is color theory.
      - slothtrop 7y ago
        Abstract thinking, in the capacity of quick intuitive guessing, does not an abstract model make. You're conflating terms. Running around interacting with the environment requires no more abstraction than an animal is capable of.
        boomlinde 7y ago
        > Abstract thinking, in the capacity of quick intuitive guessing, does not an abstract model make. You're conflating terms. Reasoning in abstract terms requires the capacity to model what you are reasoning about in abstract terms. As far as I'm concerned, that's not conflation. As soon as the world appears to you in terms of higher level concepts, you have a model of it in your head that's abstract; not concrete. You seem to disagree, on the basis that an abstract model necessarily entails using glyphs? A prediction, e.g. "the bike will tip over if it stops moving" requires that I understand on some level the concept of causality, the concept of a bike, the concept of movement etc. Using my understanding of these concepts, I can predict potential outcomes for my actions. You call it intuitive guessing, and maybe you never needed training wheels, but this is something that most people have to learn and internalize. In my view, the notion, while riding, that it'll hurt more if you fall off at a high speed is similar in nature to "F = m₁m₂/r²", differing mostly in scope, terminology and subject. Newton's law of universal gravitation is a lot like an "intuitive guess" in that it's a prediction based on limited information that broke down with the introduction of new information. > Running around interacting with the environment requires no more abstraction than an animal is capable of. I agree. When did you last see another animal ride a bicycle, though? Even animals that are much quicker to react than us and have mastered within months of their lives movement and spatial awareness to a degree which most humans can only ever hope to ever achieve suck at simple mechanical obstacles. We're amazed when cats, that can jump several body lengths from one thin branch to another to catch a bird before it has thought to fly off, do something as conceptually simple as opening a door using a handle to get where they want to go. A dog that can smell and track down a hare in a field of flowers will amuse us to no end if it shows the slightest hint of recognizing some concept more advanced than a ball.

slothtrop 7y ago

There's a difference between physics in abstract, more akin to math, and physics as intuitive assessment of your surroundings.

boomlinde 7y ago
What is the difference? It seems to me that in order to successfully predict how I should handle my bike when riding it not to fall over, I must be using an abstract model of physical reality that I draw conclusions from.
- slothtrop 7y ago
  Approximating isn't the same as an abstract model, which uses glyphs and, well, math.
  - boomlinde 7y ago
    Glyphs have absolutely nothing to do with it, or do you propose that writing predates abstract thinking? I'd say that abstract thinking is a prerequisite for language. You can't communicate with others unless you can distill the physical world into abstract higher-order concepts. In doing so, you create an abstract model of the world. For example you may point and call that thing a bicycle. In reality, the concept of a bicycle is just a figment of your representational model that happens to roughly coincide with mine. Maybe an abstract model uses mathematics, but only necessarily in the sense that one could say that I'm using set theory to pick my nose. It's a bit like saying that watching TV is color theory.
    - slothtrop 7y ago
      Abstract thinking, in the capacity of quick intuitive guessing, does not an abstract model make. You're conflating terms. Running around interacting with the environment requires no more abstraction than an animal is capable of.
      - boomlinde 7y ago
        > Abstract thinking, in the capacity of quick intuitive guessing, does not an abstract model make. You're conflating terms. Reasoning in abstract terms requires the capacity to model what you are reasoning about in abstract terms. As far as I'm concerned, that's not conflation. As soon as the world appears to you in terms of higher level concepts, you have a model of it in your head that's abstract; not concrete. You seem to disagree, on the basis that an abstract model necessarily entails using glyphs? A prediction, e.g. "the bike will tip over if it stops moving" requires that I understand on some level the concept of causality, the concept of a bike, the concept of movement etc. Using my understanding of these concepts, I can predict potential outcomes for my actions. You call it intuitive guessing, and maybe you never needed training wheels, but this is something that most people have to learn and internalize. In my view, the notion, while riding, that it'll hurt more if you fall off at a high speed is similar in nature to "F = m₁m₂/r²", differing mostly in scope, terminology and subject. Newton's law of universal gravitation is a lot like an "intuitive guess" in that it's a prediction based on limited information that broke down with the introduction of new information. > Running around interacting with the environment requires no more abstraction than an animal is capable of. I agree. When did you last see another animal ride a bicycle, though? Even animals that are much quicker to react than us and have mastered within months of their lives movement and spatial awareness to a degree which most humans can only ever hope to ever achieve suck at simple mechanical obstacles. We're amazed when cats, that can jump several body lengths from one thin branch to another to catch a bird before it has thought to fly off, do something as conceptually simple as opening a door using a handle to get where they want to go. A dog that can smell and track down a hare in a field of flowers will amuse us to no end if it shows the slightest hint of recognizing some concept more advanced than a ball.