RE: Do you believe in god or math?
October 2, 2011 at 2:13 am
(This post was last modified: October 2, 2011 at 2:34 am by Modular Moog V.)
(October 1, 2011 at 1:10 pm)edk141 Wrote:(September 29, 2011 at 10:18 pm)Pendragon Wrote: No kidding? And in the "real" world" they will never match the perfect idea in our head. If you take a pound of sugar (you will never get a "perfect" pound)
but then you will never be able to divide it into 3 perfectly equal piles. Do you know nothing about the real world? You might get close, but that is not good enough for the idea of "3 equal piles" in our mind.
The real world will never match the subjective image in our mind.
By the way, I am holding one finger up. Am I saying Fuck YOU, or am I relaying the idea of 1?
YES THEY WILL! They do all the time! That doesn't detract in the slightest from my point, but this makes me angry! If you have an orange, how many oranges do you have? Not 1.02 or 1.3502376502386819305723067423805237049325893205723096731095314 or some impossibly accurate but not-quite-1 number of oranges, you have exactly one.
The sugar can be divided into three equal piles, if we're using an equal number of grains of sugar rather than equal mass. Each grain of sugar is discrete and can be counted exactly, and if there is a multiple of 3 number of grains of sugar in the original pile, it will divide exactly into 3.
Your last point appears to bear no relevance to anything. Please elaborate.
(September 30, 2011 at 9:36 am)Pendragon Wrote: We use math to simplify our understanding of how objects relate in the world. It is a tool from inside. Everything in the objective world has mass, and energy. What mass, and energy do you ascribe to numbers, as you believe them to also be objective?
Light doesn't have mass. Are you saying it's not in the objective world?
Last point first. I should have said energy or mass. But there is no experiment we can yet devise that can prove this. If we could create in the lab (an exotic type of machine,)
the conditions of absolute zero, the photon would be at rest, and we could see if it has mass. We remain in limbo.
Big problems testing this here: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Pa..._mass.html
So how about that sugar? Do you know of a machine that can balance out 1/3 lb with zero error? Ever look at manufacturing in this objective world of actually doing it, rather than imagining it?
We have never as humans (not for lack of trying), made an observation, or made a machine that can measure mass/energy in this world, to zero percent error.
(if we could make perfect observations, we could make perfect machines) So far, not yet.
This physical world is the objective world. That is 100 percent failure making perfect observations of this world. Fail!
Math, when proved out right, is 100 percent correct. 1+1 =2. Perfect!
Which world is that existing in again?
As a last little bit, referring to oranges, you had a slightly rotting moldy orange, and someone gave me a blood orange, that doesn't look orange color, but I guess we each have 1 orange. Mine was fresh off the tree.
1 =1
Blood orange: not equal to your moldy rotten one.
Next time we fight over this, lets use snowflakes.
When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.
Mark Twain
Mark Twain