I can visualize a concept in 3D but I am too lazy and sloppy to calculate, this is especially true in my understanding of chess, math and science. I also find that analogy, while helpful as entry point is often misleading in actual case.
Can you give an example Mark, of a mathematical equation describing a real-world thing/force? Even something really simple I don't care, but I'd like to sample this mathematical linguistics analogy type dealio~
Okay, here is an IVP (initial value problem) containing a second order linear ODE (ordinary differential equation) that models an object falling near the surface of the Earth (constant acceleration due to gravity) and subject to a force of drag that varies linearly with speed:
Actually, chemistry makes no sense to me until I realized that the transformation of chemical elements are actually dictated by empirical evidences instead of pure math. That makes things simpler.
If we model the can as a right circular cylinder for simplicity, then its surface area is the sum of the areas of two circles and a rectangle.
YES! Dude! Exactly see if you fed that into a computer it could then model a beer can right? That's the purpose of math, to describe objects and forces in our universe interacting with one another factually/precisely. Gotta love it
What is actually Mathematics? As you can see, I regard is as a language. Consequently, just like any other language, it does not factually/accurately describe reality as claimed by Gandu.
I would say that's the purpose of applied math, but pure math need not, and frequently does not aim to model anything in the real world. Sometimes, it turns out that it indeed can be used for that purpose, but that wasn't necessarily the original goal. It used to be that the mathematicians were ahead of the physicists as far as mathematics went, but in recent years, the mathematical physicists have been pushing the mathematical frontiers themselves. Ed Witten is a good example, as he won The Fields Medal (the most prestigious award in the field of mathematics), the only physicist to win the award.
Pilots running through their pre-flight routines having to do with weight and fuel would disagree with you. These men stake their lives on math. What are you getting at exactly, that reality is only defined by our perceptions or that our perceptions are inadequately aligned with reality again? Dude, stop. Go buy some Absinthe. Drink that. And tell me about how you percieve your reality then LOL
That's a difficult question...I would begin here if I were attempting to define mathematics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_mathematics
So physics describes real-world forces at work for use in travel, communications, and even space flight right? It's my thinking that the more practical something is the better it is, so he was probably describing some strange otherworldly forces at play right, like how the Earth spins as it's dragged through the cosmos by the sun's gravity well? Or is that Astrophysics.... I do agree that math is a language though, but its one that can be used practically. Damnit I want to see some equations representing some shit now! I always wanted to be a pilot but never took Pure Math which was a requirement where I'm from
Exactly! Can you help explain to Gandu that his example is what we call classic Newtonian Mechanics? And that Newtonian Mechanic itself doesn't actually represent reality but is consistent enough to be used on macro scale and on certain conditions.
Physics includes a great number of topics, but yes in general physics aims to describe/predict/explain how things work in the natural world. It is the most fundamental of the natural sciences. But, in many cases, where we can, we use simplifications so that we can solve the resulting equations explicitly, rather than having to rely on numerical approximations. For example, when we send a rocket into orbit or to the moon, we ignore the gravity of Jupiter, because its affect, while real, is negligible,
