4 ms·

There probably is a finite amount of math to be done The universe is bounded by rules, as far as we can tell, and not a lot of them

logicchains 5d ago
>The universe is bounded by rules That's physics. Not all math is physics.
- unsupp0rted 5d ago
  The universe imposes strict limits on the math that can exist within it, and certain broader limits on the math the creatures and well-organized sand within the universe can conceive of in the first place, whether or not it can maybe exist in other universes. At those levels math and physics are the same bound: the bound of things the universe allows to be conceived of inside it. It’s possible the math our monkey brains + sand can ever conceive of in this universe is a low and accessible amount.
  - mathgeek 5d ago
    > The universe imposes strict limits on the math that can exist within it, and certain broader limits on the math the creatures and well-organized sand within the universe can conceive of in the first place, whether or not it can maybe exist in other universes. When you have a moment, please reference some proofs supporting this.
    - unsupp0rted 5d ago
      There are lots of thoughts you’re not biologically capable of thinking. That means the list of thoughts you’re capable of thinking is finite. That means the amount of math you’re capable of discovering, even if you lived forever, is finite. That’s true of all humans and all constructs. So however much math there is to discover, that’s the finite subset you’ll ever have access to. It’s hard to prove what thoughts no human and no construct is capable of generating, but surely there are some, and it’s possible or even likely some of those are math-related.
      - sthomer2 5d ago
        Even if we accept that there are "lots of thoughts" we're not capable of thinking (though I wonder how you would define a thought if not as something that you can think), it still does not follow that the "amount of math" (as if it's a definite quantity) that one could discover is necessarily finite, if you lived forever. By analogy, the "amount of math" we can possibly discover could still be countably infinite even if the space of all possible thoughts would be uncountably infinite. Countably infinite is still plenty big, and it is certainly not finite.
        unsupp0rted 5d ago
        To put what I said another way, math may be infinite in principle, but the creatures in our universe can only conceive of or perceive so much of it: a finite amount. We (or our constructs) can plausibly mine all there is and then there's no more that's physically possible for us or our constructs to mine within the universe in which we exist. If an ant can't conceive of or perceive trigonometry that doesn't mean trigonometry doesn't exist. But if neither an ant nor a human nor any creature or construct or technology inside the current universe, now or ever, can conceive of or perceive trigonometry, then we might as well call it non-existent. It may exist: but we'd literally never know it and neither would our constructs or space aliens or inter-dimensional aliens, or their constructs, etc. Say that there's a level of mathematics at which a blerg is a zorg, but our universe includes neither blergs nor zorgs and no intelligences in our universe can conceive of blergs/zorgs because that would require having evolved outside our universe... in that case we can consider our universe's mathematics solved without it needing to work down to the blerg and zorg level.
      - solomonb 5d ago
        The natural numbers are countably infinite. For each n ∈ ℕ, there is a proof by reflexivity that n = n. Hence there are countably infinitely many such proofs, one for each natural number.
    - bluecheese452 5d ago
      Please make substantive comments. Going around message boards demanding proofs is not conducive to good discussion.
      - mathgeek 5d ago
        I didn’t demand anything. I requested some proofs since this thread is quite literally about a claim that requires proofs. As evidenced by the further comments in the thread. If you disapprove of the conversation, please feel free to use the tools and move on. No hard feelings!
        bluecheese452 5d ago
        Please don’t use pedantry.
- CrimsonRain 5d ago
  Which math is not physics (and chemistry)? Fundamentally, all these are same
  - sacado2 5d ago
    The concept of infinity?
wanderlust123 5d ago
Why does the universe being bounded imply mathematics is finite?
- unsupp0rted 5d ago
  Because the bounded universe creates bounds on what the intelligences within it can conceive of as mathematics. We can conceive of lots of mathematics that our own universe doesn't necessarily support. But only that much and no more: we're still made of stuff inside the universe, and so are our tools, so there are upper limits on our conception.
groundzeros2015 5d ago
If you study the history of math you’ll find that the interest in certain problems changes based on culture and technology. In our lifetimes computers have made a lot of combinatorial and graph questions meaningful that otherwise would not be interesting.
- unsupp0rted 5d ago
  The history of math was done on human scales. Same as the history of chess.
drdec 5d ago
> There probably is a finite amount of math to be done > The universe is bounded by rules, as far as we can tell, and not a lot of them Respectfully, this is not a useful frame for the discussion. Nobody is expecting to reach the limit you have noted either with or without the assistance of LLMs. So there is always more math that could be done.
- deleted 5d ago
  [deleted]

logicchains 5d ago

>The universe is bounded by rules That's physics. Not all math is physics.

unsupp0rted 5d ago
The universe imposes strict limits on the math that can exist within it, and certain broader limits on the math the creatures and well-organized sand within the universe can conceive of in the first place, whether or not it can maybe exist in other universes. At those levels math and physics are the same bound: the bound of things the universe allows to be conceived of inside it. It’s possible the math our monkey brains + sand can ever conceive of in this universe is a low and accessible amount.
- mathgeek 5d ago
  > The universe imposes strict limits on the math that can exist within it, and certain broader limits on the math the creatures and well-organized sand within the universe can conceive of in the first place, whether or not it can maybe exist in other universes. When you have a moment, please reference some proofs supporting this.
  - unsupp0rted 5d ago
    There are lots of thoughts you’re not biologically capable of thinking. That means the list of thoughts you’re capable of thinking is finite. That means the amount of math you’re capable of discovering, even if you lived forever, is finite. That’s true of all humans and all constructs. So however much math there is to discover, that’s the finite subset you’ll ever have access to. It’s hard to prove what thoughts no human and no construct is capable of generating, but surely there are some, and it’s possible or even likely some of those are math-related.
    - sthomer2 5d ago
      Even if we accept that there are "lots of thoughts" we're not capable of thinking (though I wonder how you would define a thought if not as something that you can think), it still does not follow that the "amount of math" (as if it's a definite quantity) that one could discover is necessarily finite, if you lived forever. By analogy, the "amount of math" we can possibly discover could still be countably infinite even if the space of all possible thoughts would be uncountably infinite. Countably infinite is still plenty big, and it is certainly not finite.
      - unsupp0rted 5d ago
        To put what I said another way, math may be infinite in principle, but the creatures in our universe can only conceive of or perceive so much of it: a finite amount. We (or our constructs) can plausibly mine all there is and then there's no more that's physically possible for us or our constructs to mine within the universe in which we exist. If an ant can't conceive of or perceive trigonometry that doesn't mean trigonometry doesn't exist. But if neither an ant nor a human nor any creature or construct or technology inside the current universe, now or ever, can conceive of or perceive trigonometry, then we might as well call it non-existent. It may exist: but we'd literally never know it and neither would our constructs or space aliens or inter-dimensional aliens, or their constructs, etc. Say that there's a level of mathematics at which a blerg is a zorg, but our universe includes neither blergs nor zorgs and no intelligences in our universe can conceive of blergs/zorgs because that would require having evolved outside our universe... in that case we can consider our universe's mathematics solved without it needing to work down to the blerg and zorg level.
    - solomonb 5d ago
      The natural numbers are countably infinite. For each n ∈ ℕ, there is a proof by reflexivity that n = n. Hence there are countably infinitely many such proofs, one for each natural number.
  - bluecheese452 5d ago
    Please make substantive comments. Going around message boards demanding proofs is not conducive to good discussion.
    - mathgeek 5d ago
      I didn’t demand anything. I requested some proofs since this thread is quite literally about a claim that requires proofs. As evidenced by the further comments in the thread. If you disapprove of the conversation, please feel free to use the tools and move on. No hard feelings!
      - bluecheese452 5d ago
        Please don’t use pedantry.
CrimsonRain 5d ago
Which math is not physics (and chemistry)? Fundamentally, all these are same
- sacado2 5d ago
  The concept of infinity?

wanderlust123 5d ago

Why does the universe being bounded imply mathematics is finite?

unsupp0rted 5d ago
Because the bounded universe creates bounds on what the intelligences within it can conceive of as mathematics. We can conceive of lots of mathematics that our own universe doesn't necessarily support. But only that much and no more: we're still made of stuff inside the universe, and so are our tools, so there are upper limits on our conception.

groundzeros2015 5d ago

If you study the history of math you’ll find that the interest in certain problems changes based on culture and technology. In our lifetimes computers have made a lot of combinatorial and graph questions meaningful that otherwise would not be interesting.

unsupp0rted 5d ago
The history of math was done on human scales. Same as the history of chess.

drdec 5d ago

> There probably is a finite amount of math to be done > The universe is bounded by rules, as far as we can tell, and not a lot of them Respectfully, this is not a useful frame for the discussion. Nobody is expecting to reach the limit you have noted either with or without the assistance of LLMs. So there is always more math that could be done.

deleted 5d ago
[deleted]