Mathematics is simply a language. It can be manipulated to lie.
Of course it can. Then you have mathematicians who know how to read it properly. lol
What you had stated, that mathematics leads to physics, I don’t agree with.
Mathematics is the language used to describe the theory. The physics must come first.
A lot of people think that. However, Physics is nothing more than an observation/experiment regarding the mathematics already in place.
From the earliest point after the “Big Bang” that we can observe, the Constants were already there, the Fundamental Forces were already there, and the Geometry was already there.
Mathematics (measurement) precedes Physics (observation).
Okay, I believe I understand your point… maybe not.
You’re regarding mathematics, in it’s purest form, as the functions of the natural universe and I’m regarding it as the description of those functions as interpreted by our limited human minds.
1 Like
I regard it as both. For example, the Planck Length is a measurement that is there regardless of whether or not we can measure and describe it. We can call it 1.616229(38)×10^−35 meters, or 6.3631×10^−34 inches until we’re blue in the face, but it’s still gonna be the same measurement whether we use Metric or Imperial. Our numbers will vary, the Planck Length will not.
There are mathematics as most people know, and there are mathematics that define our very existence. The latter of which, cannot be contested; the former, is why we have things like the global warming BS.
The mathematical measurement is the human interpretation of a phenomenon of nature.
I’m likely splitting hairs here, but the math is the human interpretation, not the phenomenon.
It’s like time. It exists in a linear sense, but we, as humans, interpret it in our limited ‘construct’. (I don’t know if that’s the right word)
Not if you accept the theory of “folding space”. Then you can move at infinite velocity without ever actually exceeding the speed of light.
Such a bridge would allow you to move both through space and time theoretically almost without limit.
The problem with the theory is that currently we can’t generate enough power to do it but with advancements in nuclear power tech it’s only a matter of time.
I keep enough bottled water to last me for a month or two. (I also have means to collect and purify rain water…and I have a small stream running through my property.)
I keep enough canned sardines, foil-packaged salmon and tuna, dry and canned dog food, and high protein candy bars to keep me and my bitch Doberman alive for 2 or 3 months.
I keep 60 to 90 gallons of gasoline in 30 gallon drums. (I rotate using 2 drums and a 35 gallon gas caddy)
I keep enough guns and ammo to hunt and defend myself and my bitch Doberman.
I suppose if I got close to starvation, I could kill and eat my neighbor’s dog. 
The Constructal Law was also there at the Big Bang…though it wasn’t defined until 1996.
1 Like
No.
(Body seems unclear, is it a complete sentence?..YES, you idiotic robot!)
I’d argue that. You can explain much of physics such as the use of a lever, resistance with a wheel vs square etc or friction without the use of math.
1 Like
You can explain the principles of the actions and reactions of such things but you cannot quantify them without measurements and mathematics.
BTW, I like your new avatar.
1 Like
No question about that but then one of the greatest theoretical physicists in history was admittedly terrible at math.
Not nearly as terrible as he might humbly have us believe though. His ability to perceive the abstract of things is what truly made him a genius imo.
I have 1-to-3 months of food for my family in the larder at all times. It really is not that difficult or expensive. Rice, beans, noodles, some cafeteria sized cans of tomato stuff, vegie oil, canned vegies and frozen beef and venison. Add salt, mason jars, vinegar, 5 days worth of gas/diesel…
After a few weeks the local fish and squirrels better watch out.
1 Like
He was a genius but throughout his career he had to get other people to do the math for him.
In the beginning it was his first wife and then through much of his career it was two of his fellow classmates.
His ability to “see beyond the math” was however incredible.
He could literally spell his theories out then he had to get others to do the math to prove them out.
For those who don’t know who we’re talking about it was Einstein.
The survivors of the next cataclysm will be “nuts” like us who are prepared.
We’ll survive on our stockpiles while the rest kill each other off scavenging and then we can pickup the rest.
It wasn’t that he “needed” the help, or that he was anything close to “bad” at math compared to any normal person. Aside from being a genius, he was smart enough to receive external input.
Regardless of the urban legends, he never flunked a math class, and he was considered a mathematical prodigy (albeit a reluctant one) as a young teenager. He spent a good portion of his life tackling mathematics that no other person had solved either, and he could hang in there with the likes of David Hilbert, lest we leave out his freakishly large parietal lobe.
Any scientist/mathematician/engineer worth their salt would have experts from related fields assisting their efforts.