3 ms·
You're just claiming it's effective. We know it's effective. But there's no reason it should be effective. It's primarily because philosophy has not caught up a
by podocarp 15d ago
You're just claiming it's effective. We know it's effective. But there's no reason it should be effective. It's primarily because philosophy has not caught up and we still can't explain the foundations of mathematics and causality. These things seem to be baked into our very nature. It is possible to image an alien race with different conceptions of logic and causality that are just unable however hard they try to formulate either proper mathematics or proper physical laws from mathematics. (Take for example the Pythagoreans who could not believe irrational numbers existed, so the famous cube root of 2 was fake news to them. They could never build their little cubic altar to whomever.)
- GoblinSlayer 14d agoMathematics can model simple parts of physics, because mathematics is simple and can do simple things, like a puddle fits in the hole. It doesn't model complicated parts of physics, because it can't to complicated things, because mathematics is invented by humies and thus limited by humie cognitive abilities.
- huurtehoog 14d ago> Mathematics can model simple parts of physics, because mathematics is simple and can do simple things, like a puddle fits in the hole. It doesn't model complicated parts of physics, because it can't to complicated things, You ought to learn some advanced mathematics to avoid making such absurd claims as "mathematics is too simple to model complex physics" Pray tell what parts of physics are too complicated for mathematics
- deleted 14d ago[deleted]
- GoblinSlayer 13d agoChaos, biology and exponential complexity.