The biggest challenge for anybody claiming that "math isn't real" is providing a plausible explanation for why math has been so incredibly successful at predicting phenomena in the real world. How can something that's not real still predict real things?
-
-
Agreed. I got a thoughtful.response from a philosopher on another thread who said that math allows you to know the world as best as you are ever going to. He said that the phenomenology vs empiricism binary was false and paralyzing.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sometimes I think math is so general it can represent almost anything, it's just that we mostly explore(d) math that's useful to us, and so it feels like it's unreasonably effective. On the other hand it's quite curious why it was so easy to axiomatize the physical sciences 1/2
-
While failing miserably in the humanities. Is it a limitation of mathematics? Or of our human intelligence and lifespan?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
My favorite explanation for "unreasonable effectiveness" is the same as the explanation for "intelligent design" -- we're seeing the result of a long evolutionary process, cultural evolution in the case of mathhttps://twitter.com/joftius/status/1298991259621580814 …
-
This goes to one of Hamming's responses to Wigner as documented here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unreasonable_Effectiveness_of_Mathematics_in_the_Natural_Sciences#Richard_Hamming …
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.