Is Math a Feature of the Universe or a Feature of Human Creation?

Io_Reign said:
I suppose what I'm wanting discussion on is:
Is there some sort of code that was used to create the universe and all things abide by (math), or did we create math to understand the patterns and randomness of the universe?
Click to expand...

It seems to me that we've been arguing about something completely different. We've been arguing about whether an abstract idea (like math) could be said to "exist", when the original topic of debate was over the origins of math. The video defined math as being real when it has a basis in the workings of the universe (originated from nature), and unreal when it is a mere creation of the human mind (originated from man).

In other words, the question we should be asking is this: Do you believe that the universe is compiled math (much like how an immersive gaming world can be deconstructed into bits of unremarkable code) and that we've extracted math from studying the universe? Or do you believe that math is just a logical construct of our human brains and that any relationship between it and the Universe is due to humans "fitting" the observational data of natural phenomena into an approximate mathematical model?

Now a lot of us seem to agree with these points:

- Math is an intangible abstraction. It does not physically exist in the form of light or matter.
- Math is a tool that humans use to try to explain the workings of the Universe.

But these statements are neutral in terms of the original debate question.

If the universe is built on some mathematical construct, obviously math will be the choice tool to study it.
If the universe isn't built on some mathematical construct, some of its manifestations may still be modeled by math.

Much like the allegory of the blind men and the elephant, maybe the reason math works so well at explaining the Universe thus far is because we've only been experiencing a part of the Universe where math appears to be the basis. Perhaps there are other things about our Universe that math cannot explain/model so well.

Personally, in writing this response, I've wavered between the two camps of thought. I have deemed myself academically unqualified to choose an official position. :p

It's sorta the same feeling I got when reading the thread on absolute truth, where reaching a conclusion seems impossible due to limited human knowledge.
 
oozinator said:
It seems to me that we've been arguing about something completely different. We've been arguing about whether an abstract idea (like math) could be said to "exist", when the original topic of debate was over the origins of math. The video defined math as being real when it has a basis in the workings of the universe (originated from nature), and unreal when it is a mere creation of the human mind (originated from man).

In other words, the question we should be asking is this: Do you believe that the universe is compiled math (much like how an immersive gaming world can be deconstructed into bits of unremarkable code) and that we've extracted math from studying the universe? Or do you believe that math is just a logical construct of our human brains and that any relationship between it and the Universe is due to humans "fitting" the observational data of natural phenomena into an approximate mathematical model?

Now a lot of us seem to agree with these points:

- Math is an intangible abstraction. It does not physically exist in the form of light or matter.
- Math is a tool that humans use to try to explain the workings of the Universe.

But these statements are neutral in terms of the original debate question.

If the universe is built on some mathematical construct, obviously math will be the choice tool to study it.
If the universe isn't built on some mathematical construct, some of its manifestations may still be modeled by math.

Much like the allegory of the blind men and the elephant, maybe the reason math works so well at explaining the Universe thus far is because we've only been experiencing a part of the Universe where math appears to be the basis. Perhaps there are other things about our Universe that math cannot explain/model so well.

Personally, in writing this response, I've wavered between the two camps of thought. I have deemed myself academically unqualified to choose an official position. :p

It's sorta the same feeling I got when reading the thread on absolute truth, where reaching a conclusion seems impossible due to limited human knowledge.
Click to expand...
In other words....
"We have to remember that what we observe is not nature in itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." -Werner Heisenberg
Click to expand...
 
I am reading a book on the reality of Time in physics and the understanding of mathematical objects (Parabola) existing not in our dimension, but in another one, a one that is free of time, as stated by Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. So I do think math is a feature of the universe, and we are just discovering it, so sort of a paradox-ish thing, the universe trying to figure out itself by trying to figure out its own meaning...
 
So ConroD messages me on facebook and says
3mQ87.png


"skim it"
"SKIM IT"

3mQdU.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top