What is it about woo that upsets you?

[Write4U]

Exactly. Mathematics is a human logical construction, which gives us a language in which to describe, quantitatively, the order and relationships we observe in nature, among other things.

And I argue that human mathematics are based on observed naturally occurring mathematical phenomena.

Mathematics (from Greek μάθημα máthēma, "knowledge, study, learning") includes the study of such topics as quantity, structure, space, and change.

Mathematicians seek and use patterns to formulate new conjectures; they resolve the truth or falsity of conjectures by mathematical proof.

When mathematical structures are good models of real phenomena, then mathematical reasoning can provide insight or predictions about nature.

Through the use of abstraction and logic, mathematics developed from counting,
calculation, measurement, and the systematic study of the shapes and motions of physical objects.

Practical mathematics has been a human activity from as far back as written records exist. The research required to solve mathematical problems can take years or even centuries of sustained inquiry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics

But plenty of mathematics has nothing to do with nature at all.

Can you clarify further?

 

[exchemist]

In observing the back & forth between billvon and Write4U - they both are confident in their positions, yet one must be wrong, right? It got me to thinking about the OP - when does an insistence on one's understanding of a subject/concept (yet the person is ''wrong''), become woo? Or can people just be lost in their erroneous thinking, and it not be considered woo?

Not that is not woo.

But I have to hand it to you wegs, this was a cracker of a thread title, for someone who has been away so long. 11 pages in the space of a week.

 

[Write4U]

So we are not modeling, or at least not always modeling - that would involve unsupported and dubious assumptions of correspondence in "reality" - but perceiving, sensing.

I think that is a profound statement. "perceiving, sensing", let me add "cognition".

This has been demonstrated in testing the ability of distinguishing "more" from "less" in primates as old as Lemurs.

It has been demonstrated, that while Lemurs do not count 1,2,3,4,5, they can recognise the difference between "quantities" as well as any human.

In fact, cognition of "duration" in recurring phenomena seems to start at very fundamental levels and in many organisms. Circadian rhythm can be observed in plants. Slime molds can remember time intervals. Paramecium can adjust their swimming pattern to avoid obstacles.

This is fundamental and would suggest that even brainless single celled organisms have a mathematical aspect of time and cognition in their molecular physical patterns.

 

[billvon]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but are you saying Write4U that math would exist, even if humans didn't? I think math only exists as a process (invented by humans) to uncover the truths of the universe.

Yes. The universe, like the dude, abides. We use math to understand it. Math is a process invented by people to understand the universe.

The processes within the universe (gravitation, EM phenomena etc) are well described by math. They are not ruled by, or even influenced, by math. They are just processes.

To use another example, the people here express their thoughts in English, and express numbers in Arabic numerals. That does not mean that the thoughts expressed are English or Arabic thoughts. If they were expressed in Chinese (or in Roman numerals) they would be the same thoughts, just using a different language to explain them. Thoughts and language are different.

 

[Write4U]

The processes within the universe (gravitation, EM phenomena etc) are well described by math. They are not ruled by, or even influenced, by math. They are just processes.

Yes, and the processes are naturally mathematical in essence. That's why we can codify them into human maths in the first place. I just don't see why that should present a logical problem. Why can the universe not function in a mathematical manner? What fundamental aspect of the universe would prevent universal values and functions from interacting mathematically?

Humans did not invent the natural spontaneous formation of regular patterns in the universe.
Human invented a symbolic language to qualify and codify the observed formation of regular patterns in the universe.

Moreover, we recognise the concept of non-chaotic (deterministic) "cause and effect" which implies regularity, which is a mathematical property.

Where is the problem............

p.s. I just realized that the Fibonacci sequence is a purely deterministic cause/effect function.

Consider the unfolding pattern; 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55. It's a purely chronological sequence adding the two previous numbers, which suggest a natural exponential function, without any need for selectivity.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

And I argue that human mathematics are based on observed naturally occurring mathematical phenomena.

i did notice a comment you made a few weeks back regarding this(and maybe 3 other referencing posts).
unfortunately i am still unable to get up to speed to be able to ask any intelligent questions about it.
disclaimer, i have not made any efort at all to start researching because i know its extremely complicated lol
but i do intend to.

 

[Write4U]

i did notice a comment you made a few weeks back regarding this(and maybe 3 other referencing posts).
unfortunately i am still unable to get up to speed to be able to ask any intelligent questions about it.
disclaimer, i have not made any efort at all to start researching because i know its extremely complicated lol
but i do intend to.

I do not claim in depth knowledge of particular physics. I am interested in a fundamental understanding of how the universe works in the most general and by what generic terms. The links I have posted in various threads are my selection of being illustrative of the way things work.

I can promise you will save time by watching the links I provided. I have spent many hours in selecting about a half dozen lectures by reputable scientists, for easy viewing and clarity in presentation without the burden of pages of complicated "human mathematics" (proofs), on a range of related universal and local physical phenomena.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

I do not claim in depth knowledge of particular physics. I am interested in a fundamental understanding of how the universe works in the most general and by what generic terms. The links I have posted in various threads are my selection of being illustrative of the way things work.

I can promise you will save time by watching the links I provided. I have spent many hours in selecting about a half dozen lectures by reputable scientists, for easy viewing and clarity in presentation without the burden of pages of complicated "human mathematics" (proofs), on a range of related universal and local physical phenomena.

mod note
this is where it would be great to have a "read later button"
so i could add this post to a list on my profile which will remind me to go to and read up on.
wouldn't have to be anything schmancy
just a |fav" button might do it
then you can look through your fav list to reference your reading list

 

[wegs]

Yes, and the processes are naturally mathematical in essence. That's why we can codify them into human maths in the first place. I just don't see why that should present a logical problem. Why can the universe not function in a mathematical manner? What fundamental aspect of the universe would prevent universal values and functions from interacting mathematically?

Humans did not invent the natural spontaneous formation of regular patterns in the universe.
Human invented a symbolic language to qualify and codify the observed formation of regular patterns in the universe.

Moreover, we recognise the concept of non-chaotic (deterministic) "cause and effect" which implies regularity, which is a mathematical property.

Where is the problem............

If I'm understanding you right, you're basically saying that the more we observe the universe, the more we ''find'' math. That it's not a human invention per se, but rather something one discovers? If humans didn't invent math though, who did? I'm not debating you, just curious.

Yes. The universe, like the dude, abides. We use math to understand it. Math is a process invented by people to understand the universe.

The processes within the universe (gravitation, EM phenomena etc) are well described by math. They are not ruled by, or even influenced, by math. They are just processes.

To use another example, the people here express their thoughts in English, and express numbers in Arabic numerals. That does not mean that the thoughts expressed are English or Arabic thoughts. If they were expressed in Chinese (or in Roman numerals) they would be the same thoughts, just using a different language to explain them. Thoughts and language are different.

Yep, gotcha. Are you a teacher, by chance?

Not that is not woo.

But I have to hand it to you wegs, this was a cracker of a thread title, for someone who has been away so long. 11 pages in the space of a week.

Woo was good for something, after all.

 

[wegs]

mod note
this is where it would be great to have a "read later button"
so i could add this post to a list on my profile which will remind me to go to and read up on.
wouldn't have to be anything schmancy
just a |fav" button might do it
then you can look through your fav list to reference your reading list

You can click on ''watch thread'' and I think it serves that purpose? Don't think there's anything that narrows it down to the post level, though.

 

[billvon]

Yep, gotcha. Are you a teacher, by chance?

Actually yes, but in a very different field.

 

[Write4U]

If I'm understanding you right, you're basically saying that the more we observe the universe, the more we ''find'' math. That it's not a human invention per se, but rather something one discovers? If humans didn't invent math though, who did? I'm not debating you, just curious.

Humans invented human maths which are symbolic representation of natural values and functions.
The link to the Great Math Mystery explains that mathematics are probably man's greatest invention, ever.
It allows us to qualify and codify observed natural phenomena. And it works spectacularly well which suggests that the Universe has mathematical properties that can be observed and codified.

But we did not invent the way the universe works. And most astrophysicist and theoretical physicist actually state that when they do their thing, they get the distinct feeling the mathematics already existed and that they are actually only discovering what is already there.

One cosmologist even put it this way "if we ask the universe a question and we ask it nicely, it will give us the answers and eventually leads us to the truth".
He was not talking about prayer, but when asking the universe a question in the proper mathematical form, it will provide the answer .

The great example of course was our asking the universe to reveal the Higgs boson, a particle that cannot be physically observed. Peter Higgs asked the universe to reveal the particle and used the right mathematics plus a lot of energy and behold, the Higgs boson became manifest for just an instant, and earned Higgs a free trip to Stockholm for a Nobel prize.

 

[wegs]

Actually yes, but in a very different field.

Okay, I just wondered. You're adept at explaining your point of view, without condescension.

 

[wegs]

Humans invented human maths which are symbolic representation of natural values and functions.
The link to the Great Math Mystery explains that mathematics are probably man's greatest invention, ever.
It allows us to qualify and codify observed natural phenomena. And it works spectacularly well which suggests that the Universe has mathematical properties that can be observed and codified.

But we did not invent the way the universe works. And most astrophysicist and theoretical physicist actually state that when they do their thing, they get the distinct feeling the mathematics already existed and that they are actually only discovering what is already there.

One cosmologist even put it this way "if we ask the universe a question and we ask it nicely, it will give us the answers and eventually leads us to the truth".
He was not talking about prayer, but when asking the universe a question in the proper mathematical form, it will provide the answer .

The great example of course was our asking the universe to reveal the Higgs boson, a particle that cannot be physically observed. Peter Higgs asked the universe to reveal the particle and used the right mathematics plus a lot of energy and behold, the Higgs boson became manifest for just an instant, and earned Higgs a free trip to Stockholm for a Nobel prize.

Sounds like you and billvon are saying similar things, but maybe your take has a touch of mysticism to it. The beauty of the universe is its mystery.

 

[Write4U]

No, it has nothing of the sort. There is nothing encoding that fractal pattern. The resulting pattern is an emergent property of the growth of the fern that just happens to be fractal.

Fractality does not happen randomly in nature. Perhaps you are thinking about a mathematical fractal instruction which produces a computer generated fractal. That's not how nature works. In nature it is a result of evolution and appears to be a dynamic potential of the spacetime itself.

Causal dynamical triangulation

(abbreviated as CDT),
theorized by Renate Loll, Jan Ambjørn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz, and popularized by Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin, is an approach to quantum gravity that like loop quantum gravity is background independent.

This means that it does not assume any pre-existing arena (dimensional space), but rather attempts to show how the spacetime fabric itself evolves.

At large scales, it re-creates the familiar 4-dimensional spacetime, but it shows spacetime to be 2-d near the Planck scale, and reveals a fractal structure on slices of constant time. These interesting results agree with the findings of Lauscher and Reuter, who use an approach called Quantum Einstein Gravity, and with other recent theoretical work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation

Then, the fractal growth instruction is a natural growth command in the DNA which produces cell growth of leaves, branches of trees and plants to form self-similar growth patterns at all levels

A fractal is a pattern that the laws of nature repeat at different scales. Examples are everywhere in the forest. Trees are natural fractals, patterns that repeat smaller and smaller copies of themselves to create the biodiversity of a forest.

Each tree branch, from the trunk to the tips, is a copy of the one that came before it. This is a basic principle that we see over and over again in the fractal structure of organic life forms throughout the natural world.

https://www.diygenius.com/fractals-in-nature/

And

Abstract
This paper deals with the digital complex representation of a DNA sequence and the analysis of existing correlations by wavelets. The symbolic DNA sequence is mapped into a nonlinear time series. By studying this time series the existence of fractal shapes and symmetries will be shown.

At first step, the indicator matrix enables us to recognize some typical patterns of nucleotide distribution. The DNA sequence, of the influenza virus A (H1N1), is investigated by using the complex representation, together with the corresponding walks on DNA; in particular, it is shown that DNA walks are fractals. Finally, by using the wavelet analysis, the existence of symmetries is proven.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/mpe/2010/507056/

However, a more comprehensive formal paper (I haven't read it yet) is available in .pdf

Abstract: Life exists in the universe because the laws of nature arising from cosmic symmetry-breaking are intrinsically fractal and embrace chaotic dynamics in a manner that permits new structure to emerge on increasing scales, as we move from the level of fundamental particles to organisms.

In a fundamental sense this is a cosmological property of the universe, because complex living systems represent the most complete interactive consummation of the four fundamental forces of nature. If the laws of nature permitted only ordered periodic, or stochastic solutions to molecular aggregation, as in crystals, or amorphous glasses, the complex structures of tissues and life would remain impossible.

http://www.fractal.org/Bewustzijns-Besturings-Model/Chris-King-fractal-universe.pdf

 

[cluelusshusbund]

...maybe your take has a touch of mysticism to it. The beauty of the universe is its mystery.

To me... the beauty in the mystery of the universe is figurin it out piece by piece.!!!

 

[wegs]

Michael, and Wegs, have you watched the Roger Antonsen examples of mathematical expressions yet? They really present a good picture of my own perspective.

No, but I will. It sounds like it will help me see, what you see. (I will admit though, math as a stand-alone subject, is kind of dry to me.) This might be the most exciting representation of it that I've seen, yet. lol

 

[Write4U]

Sounds like you and billvon are saying similar things, but maybe your take has a touch of mysticism to it. The beauty of the universe is its mystery.

LOL, it's interesting you should take my perspective of a mathematical universe as being more mystical than mainstream science.
I beg to differ. The concept of a mathematically functioning universe to me is much more concrete than any of the mainstream definitions, such as Schrodinger's cat

Schrödinger's cat: a cat, a flask of poison, and a radioactive source are placed in a sealed box. ... The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics implies that after a while, the cat is simultaneously alive and dead. Yet, when one looks in the box, one sees the cat either alive or dead, not both alive and dead.

The Copenhagen interpretation is an expression of the meaning of quantum mechanics that was largely devised from 1925 to 1927 by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. It remains one of the most commonly taught interpretations of quantum mechanics.

According to the Copenhagen interpretation, physical systems generally do not have definite properties prior to being measured, and quantum mechanics can only predict the probability distribution of a given measurement's possible results. The act of measurement affects the system, causing the set of probabilities to reduce to only one of the possible values immediately after the measurement. This feature is known as wave function collapse.

Now, to be sure, I do not question mainstream science or any of its interpretations.

I merely posit that all functions described by mainstream science follow mathematical imperatives, IOW,
everything that happens in the universe has a mathematical aspect. Simple and straight forward.

That's why and in the main how we can qualify and codify naturally occurring values and functions.

Example; if an specific atom has a specific mass and charge, these are mathematical potentials which can be quantified and codified with human mathematics. That is not mysterious in any way, IMO

What does "collapse of the wave function" mean other than a mathematical phenomenon, which results in physical change?

 

[Michael 345]

And I argue that human mathematics are based on observed naturally occurring mathematical phenomena

NO

Human mathematics are IMPOSED on observed natural phenomena

I have moved to a world with no mathematics and no music

So now my observations are colour coded

 

[Write4U]

NO

Human mathematics are IMPOSED on observed natural phenomena

I have moved to a world with no mathematics and no music

So now my observations are colour coded

I agree. But that does nothing to discredit the concept of a Universe that is ruled by (n0n-human) mathematical laws, inherent potentials of the spacetime geometry itself.

Everyone is stuck on the concept that any concept of mathematical values and functions have to be human in origin.

Human symbolic mathematical representations of Universal values and functions are of human origin.
Universal mathematical values and functions are the naturally occurring observed values and functions on which human symbolic representations are based.
And why not?