Why study math?

Post Reply New Topic

If we define 1+1=2, then it is true by definition. Note that in defining 1+1=2 we define three things: the process of addition, the meaning of the equality sign, and the use of numbers to specify a quantity.

1+1=2 is strictly true at the Newtonian level, and generally true at the quantum level (I believe, I am not certain on the full range of implications quantum scale properties have on math).



Most of those are Engineers or Physicists anyways.

I have to say, this one bothered me. Where did you get the strange idea that 1+1=2 is provable from?

1+1=0 (when addition is modulu 2, for instance)
1+1=1 (when set addition is concerned - the set of all apples plus the set of all apples is still the set of all apples)
1+1=2 (convenient for conventional arithmetic, usually, and provable, in that context)
1+1=many (when your counting system stops rather early)
1+1=infinity (I'm sure I could come up with a good one of these, but I'm lazy)
1+1=-1 (rotations through 120 degrees)
1+1=-2/179 (rotations through 179 degrees)
1+1=<number><addop><number> (BNF)
1+1>=2 (procreation)

I first got into math for the high paying job part. I wanted to study sharks and the likelihood of getting hired with a math minor is higher than one without.

then I switched to getting a degree in math. I like patterns, connections and relationships. They calm me, interest me, and I am good at it. The reasoning skills apply to everything I encounter.

my friends send me patterns to calm me down and make me happy.

I want a PhD in math and physics.

G-D made math for the Aspies.


ruveyn

"Mathematics are good for a woman's mind. Male mathematicians are not."
-- ephemerella, 2008

I appreciate your study of math and your dedication to the discovery of truth but has It ever occured to you, even for a second, that numbers perhaps can't say enough and that there might be math beyond what we know today?

Of course. But should that deter me from finding what truth I can?

Erm. What have numbers got to do with mathematics?

And... in a sense, there is no "math beyond what we know today". Mathematics is never "invented". It's not even "discovered". The Rolls Royce has always been there. The mathematician just comes along and takes the covers off, so you can see it, in all its glory.

Math is useful for more meaningful studies.

I mean, we can say "ooh, patterns are so cool!" but is there any other reason to study such a subject other than the application? Math isn't even a matter of absolute truth, so much as it is a matter of tautology. In a system where 1 + 1 = 2, then 1 + 1 = 2, if 1, 2, +, or = were defined differently, then the outcome would be different, so math is just an analysis of a system with a number of set rules. As lau points out, math isn't created, discovered, or anything like that, it represents relations that already are by their necessity, the car already exists.

This isn't to express a hatred towards those who love math, but I only see it as a set of puzzles with the applications as actually being where the magic happens, and where math takes on meaning.

We need to know science to create new technologies to improve life. We need to know math to do science. Math is like the secret extra laws of physics that are even more essential than the regular laws of physics. Without math, the universe just wouldn't happen. You can't say that about other things like Literature or World History.

I imagine this sort of ambivalence has always existed at some level, but it's certainly become less prevalent after seemingly obscure branches of mathematics turned out to have very useful applications.

Well, the issue is that the universe comes before math, not vice versa. Math isn't a law of physics, but rather an expression of facts about the nature of definition, along the same lines of logic. In any case, without math there could not be a conceived universe, right, but that is only because conceivable things must be mathematical/logical, but not much else. Literature and world history though provides knowledge about human realities.

I never said that obscure branches of mathematics haven't had useful applications, but math and usefulness are not the same thing, and certainly there is more directly relevant with the direct study of the phenomenon, and some of the innovators in mathematics did work more related to these other subjects, often in physics mind you.

How much math have you studied?

Based on his blog post, I would guess that AG has studied at least up to the level of multivariable calculus and ordinary differential equations, and that while he was still in high school. He's now in econ, so presumably he hasn't had to bother with that much math at the university level.