3 ms·
You don't care about mathematics in the sense that the word describes what mathematicians do, then. You care about physics. There's a distinct difference. Ma
by pmiller2 6y ago
You don't care about mathematics in the sense that the word describes what mathematicians do, then. You care about physics. There's a distinct difference. Mathematics predicts nothing; it simply illuminates what is already there.
- dwheeler 6y agoCurrent mathematics is an untrustworthy flashlight. A claimed proof can be later found false, toppling all built on it. If we want illumination, we need better. The standard for proof acceptance should become formal verification. Mathematicians are simply no longer emough if your goal is certainty.
- ur-whale 6y ago> You care about physics. No, that's not what I meant. I am a computer engineer not a structural one. When I talk about building, I mean code, and making sure it does what it's supposed to. Unless you count algorithms and their behavior to fall under the umbrella of physics, of course. Mathematics most certainly does help predict what the behavior of my code will be. It's really not about illumination, it's about taking monster shortcuts in my code because a solidly proved theorem allows me to. > the word describes what mathematicians do, I think you just described what you think mathematicians do. I do know a number of pure mathematicians who think of their trade rather differently, namely they are trying to build useful math. > it simply illuminates what is already there. Now, we're strictly entering the domain of faith-based thinking. Are things already there only to be discovered, or do we invent them? Does the tree make a noise when it falls in the forest when no one is there to hear it fall? Pick your religion.