Write4U's stream of consciousness

[Write4U]

Mathematical object
Anything with which mathematical reasoning is possible

A mathematical object is an abstract concept arising in mathematics. In the usual language of mathematics, an object is anything that has been formally defined, and with which one may do deductive reasoning and mathematical proofs.

Typically, a mathematical object can be a value that can be assigned to a variable, and therefore can be involved in formulas. Commonly encountered mathematical objects include numbers, sets, functions, expressions, geometric objects, transformations of other mathematical objects, and spaces.

Mathematical objects can be very complex; for example, theorems, proofs, and even theories are considered as mathematical objects in proof theory.

The ontological status of mathematical objects has been the subject of much investigation and debate by philosophers of mathematics.[1]

Wikipedia

I understand that concept and I can appreciate an abstract Mathematical Ordering function and ts natural functional utility as a Universal "guiding principle" in self-forming and self-organizing systems (patterns) as the Universe appears to spawn spontaneously but in discrete mathematically based forms.

Evolution is a biologically physical process, based on mathematical probability.
A chromosome is a mathematical object

How is biology related to mathematics?

The field of mathematical biology examines the mathematical representations of biological systems and is a crucial aspect of better understanding the natural world. This includes the formulation of mathematical models, which can be used to predict or describe natural occurrences in a wide variety of useful ways.

How is math involved in genetics?

In applications to genetics, these algebras often have a basis corresponding to the genetically different gametes, and the structure constant of the algebra encode the probabilities of producing offspring of various types. The laws of inheritance are then encoded as algebraic properties of the algebra.

Genetic algebra - Wikipedia

 

[Pinball1970]

I understand that concept and I can appreciate an abstract Mathematical Ordering function and ts natural functional utility as a Universal "guiding principle" in self-forming and self-organizing systems (patterns) as the Universe appears to spawn spontaneously but in discrete mathematically based forms.

Bullshit.

Evolution is a biologically physical process, based on mathematical probability

No

chromosome is a mathematical object

No it isn't, it is a collection of genetic material, a physical thing, you can see it under a microscope.

Mathematics is conceptual as pointed out by James but you decided to ignore him and continue to make stuff up.

Third time of asking, do you want to know some STEM or not?

 

[Pinball1970]

OK, pose a narrative question that is related to fundamental Mathematics

You mean ask you a question about mathematics?
Why do you over complicate your sentences with unnecessary words?

What is a "narrative" question as opposed to a question?

What do you mean by "fundamental" mathematics as opposed to mathematics?

This is why "relational value" keeps cropping up, also "self referential value/equations/potential." It is meaningless.

If you take this on board, we will follow you better.

 

[exchemist]

You mean ask you a question about mathematics?
Why do you over complicate your sentences with unnecessary words?

What is a "narrative" question as opposed to a question?

What do you mean by "fundamental" mathematics as opposed to mathematics?

This is why "relational value" keeps cropping up, also "self referential value/equations/potential." It is meaningless.

If you take this on board, we will follow you better.

Stripping out the redundant verbiage, I suppose we are left with "Pose a question about mathematics".

Something like "What is a real number?" perhaps.

 

[origin]

Mathematical object
Anything with which mathematical reasoning is possible

In your opinion, what isn't a mathematical object?

 

[Write4U]

Bullshit.

Quantum state

In quantum physics, a quantum state is a mathematical entity that embodies the knowledge of a quantum system. Quantum mechanics specifies the construction, evolution, and measurement of a quantum state. The result is a quantum-mechanical prediction for the system represented by the state. Knowledge of the quantum state, and the quantum mechanical rules for the system's evolution in time, exhausts all that can be known about a quantum system.

Quantum states may be defined differently for different kinds of systems or problems. Two broad categories are: wave functions describing quantum systems using position or momentum variables and the more abstract vector quantum states.

Historical, educational, and application-focused problems typically feature wave functions; modern professional physics uses the abstract vector states. In both categories, quantum states divide into pure versus mixed states, or into coherent states and incoherent states. Categories with special properties include stationary states for time independence and quantum vacuum states in quantum field theory.

As a tool for physics, quantum states grew out of states in classical mechanics. A classical dynamical state consists of a set of dynamical variables with well-defined real values at each instant of time.[1]: 3  [/quote]

No

Compared to evolutionary theory, gravitational theory is very simple, so simple that our existing mathematics can be used to fully describe it. Parts of evolutionary theory can be described with mathematics (for example, population genetics) but the entire theory is currently beyond our math ability. Jun 30, 2018

That is a shortcoming in human mathematics, not nature's. [/quote] Mathematics makes possible the management and analysis of the massive database of the Human Genome Project. Numerical analysis, statistics and modeling play a significant role in mapping and sequencing our DNA -- the blueprint for the genetic information that determines what makes each of us unique. [/quote] It is the mathematics of the coded values that determine the genetic expression.

This is why mutation (alteration of the code) becomes expressed as a change in the organism's physical coding pattern (mathematics).

Mathematics is conceptual as pointed out by James but you decided to ignore him and continue to make stuff up.

I don't see Tegmark humbly changing his hypothesis, based on James' conception of mathematics without

Third time of asking, do you want to know some STEM or not?

I already asked you to provide an issue you believe I have problem with. It is not fair of you to ask me to ask you about something I do not know or understand, can't you see that?

 

[Write4U]

You mean ask you a question about mathematics?
Why do you over complicate your sentences with unnecessary words? Why don't you just answer my question as posed.

I am confident that you can come up with something that fits the question as posed.

What is a "narrative" question as opposed to a question?

Not opposed, just posed as narrative, not equations.

What do you mean by "fundamental" mathematics as opposed to mathematics?

Ok, let me use a quote to phrase it correctly.

Foundations of mathematics can be conceived as the study of the basic mathematical concepts (set, function, geometrical figure, number, etc.) and how they form hierarchies of more complex structures and concepts, especially the fundamentally important structures that form the language of mathematics (formulas, theories and their models giving a meaning to formulas, definitions, proofs, algorithms, etc.) also called metamathematical concepts, with an eye to the philosophical aspects and the unity of mathematics.

The search for foundations of mathematics is a central question of the philosophy of mathematics; the abstract nature of mathematical objects presents special philosophical challenges.

The
foundations of mathematics as a whole does not aim to contain the foundations of every mathematical topic. Generally, the foundations of a field of study refers to a more-or-less systematic analysis of its most basic or fundamental concepts, its conceptual unity and its natural ordering or hierarchy of concepts, which may help to connect it with the rest of human knowledge. The development, emergence, and clarification of the foundations can come late in the history of a field, and might not be viewed by everyone as its most interesting part.

Mathematics plays a special role in scientific thought, serving since ancient times as a model of truth and rigor for rational inquiry, and giving tools or even a foundation for other sciences (especially Physics). Mathematics' many developments towards higher abstractions in the 19th century brought new challenges and paradoxes, urging for a deeper and more systematic examination of the nature and criteria of mathematical truth, as well as a unification of the diverse branches of mathematics into a coherent whole.

The systematic search for the foundations of mathematics started at the end of the 19th century and formed a new mathematical discipline called mathematical logic, which later had strong links to theoretical computer science.

It went through a series of crises with paradoxical results, until the discoveries stabilized during the 20th century as a large and coherent body of mathematical knowledge with several aspects or components (set theory, model theory, proof theory, etc.), whose detailed properties and possible variants are still an active research field. Its high level of technical sophistication inspired many philosophers to conjecture that it can serve as a model or pattern for the foundations of other sciences.

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

This is why "relational value" keeps cropping up, also "self referential value/equations/potential." It is meaningless.

The universe does not deal with symbolic values, humans do. But the Universe does consist of natural generic values that relate and allow for mathematically guided interaction, depending on the differential equation that exists between these naturally emergent or acquired self-referential values and potential (as in "that" which may become reality).

 

[Write4U]

In your opinion, what isn't a mathematical object?

And we finally arrive at Tegmark's MUH proposal that the entire universe is a mathematical object and that all universal physical processes are based on the mathematical interaction of generic relational values of sorts, even if these values are physical in nature.

I believe Time is an abstract mathematical object that emerges with any chronology of physical change. AFAIK, Time is always additive,
i.e. The 4th dimension of Time is a purely mathematical object (dimension).

here is an answer from Stack Exchange
Is time more "real" than math and, if so, why?

Any reconciliation between quantum field theory and general relativity is going to have to find a notion of time they can share, that is a notion of time (and space) that is quantised rather than continuous.
https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/53861/is-time-more-real-than-math-and-if-so-why#

And that suggest that time is a countable mathematical result of "duration" of change.

 

[Sarkus]

No, it doesn't. It suggests that it is discrete rather than analogue.
A "mathematical result of change" suggests that time is a result of change, rather than change being the result of time. Or, perhaps, time and change being different perspectives of the same phenomenon, one not being the cause of the other.

So, please, be careful with the conclusions you draw. I wouldn't want you to assume something that is not warranted from the source material.

 

[Pinball1970]

And we finally arrive at Tegmark's MUH proposal that the entire universe is a mathematical object and that all universal physical processes are based on the mathematical interaction of generic relational values of sorts, even if these values are physical in nature.

I believe Time is an abstract mathematical object that emerges with any chronology of physical change. AFAIK, Time is always additive,
i.e. The 4th dimension of Time is a purely mathematical object (dimension).

here is an answer from Stack Exchange
Is time more "real" than math and, if so, why?
And that suggest that time is a countable mathematical result of "duration" of change.

Stupid trolling idiot.

I'm done.

You post this backward crap in hard science I will report you and keep going till you are gone.

 

[Pinball1970]

processes are based on the mathematical interaction of generic relational values

Absolute idiot, incapable of interacting or absorbing anything of value.

Brainless cretin.

 

[Write4U]

Stupid trolling idiot.
I'm done.

Absolute idiot, incapable of interacting or absorbing anything of value.

What kind of value? Mathematical?

Brainless cretin

You do know that is a scientifically incorrect statement.
Are you trolling for response?

You post this backward crap in hard science I will report you and keep going till you are gone.

Wow, you found a purpose in your scientific life. Good for you. I hope you get rich.

What then are you doing in pseudo-science if you won't let people post their perspective, regardless of the hard science posted elsewhere?

For all that valuable knowledge of truth you possess, you have taught me NOTHING. I no longer care about your personal opinion of me.

Get a haircut and show some social grace.

 

[Write4U]

No, it doesn't. It suggests that it is discrete rather than analogue.
A "mathematical result of change" suggests that time is a result of change, rather than change being the result of time. Or, perhaps, time and change being different perspectives of the same phenomenon, one not being the cause of the other.

I didn't say that change is a result of time or that time is a result of change.
I said: "And that suggests that time is a countable mathematical result of "duration" of change". I was careful to use that specific terminology and I think that is a correct statement. If not, I would really appreciate a constructive correction.

So, please, be careful with the conclusions you draw. I wouldn't want you to assume something that is not warranted from the source material.

Thanks for that sage advice.
I really do spend time in researching and cross-referencing what I post and quote in context of the subject under discussion.
I regret that my method of communication presents problems.

But this clearly is not a matter of debate about the existence of natural mathematical values and functional processes. I believe there is general scientific consensus on the concept of a natural inherent generic mathematical aspects to spacetime and Universal geometry..

As long as science stipulates a mathematical aspect to the concept of spacetime, but that science has not yet discovered all the mathematical properties of the Universe, what is wrong with discussing mathematics in context of Tegmark's Mathematical Universe Hypothesis?

As far as I can see, nothing about universal mathematics has been settled for the past few thousand years, from Pythagoras on.

This little scientific diagram makes perfect sense to me from a mathematical perspective.

Function (mathematics)

Schematic depiction of a function described metaphorically as a "machine" or "black box" that for each input yields a corresponding output.

What is this if not a mathematical process?

Function, in mathematics, an expression, rule, or law that defines a relationship between one variable (the independent variable) and another variable (the dependent variable). Functions are ubiquitous in mathematics and are essential for formulating physical relationships in the sciences.

I submit that this "naturally occurring" process applies to all changes, everywhere.
That's why I like Tegmark's arguments.

 

[exchemist]

Stupid trolling idiot.

I'm done.

You post this backward crap in hard science I will report you and keep going till you are gone.

and, finally...........FUNGGG!!!, your patience has snapped, thanks to the interminable, stubborn idiocy of Write4U.

Welcome to our world, hahaha.

 

[exchemist]

What kind of value? Mathematical?
You do know that is a scientifically incorrect statement.
Are you trolling for response?
Wow, you found a purpose in your scientific life. Good for you. I hope you get rich.

What then are you doing in pseudo-science if you won't let people post their perspective, regardless of the hard science posted elsewhere?

For all that valuable knowledge of truth you possess, you have taught me NOTHING. I no longer care about your personal opinion of me.

Get a haircut and show some social grace.

Weg!

 

[Write4U]

Weg!

Is that English? And do you know what that word means?
I know what that means in Dutch. I am Dutch.

weg , noun
road [noun] a strip of ground usually with a hard level surface for people, vehicles etc to travel on
road [noun] a route; the correct road(s) to follow in order to arrive somewhere
road [noun] a way that leads to something

Does that mean my weg is a mathematically constructed abstract road to follow in order to arrive somewhere?...

 

[Write4U]

Welcome to our world, hahaha.

Mount Olympus!....

 

[Sarkus]

I didn't say that change is a result of time or that time is a result of change.
I said: "And that suggests that time is a countable mathematical result of "duration" of change". I was careful to use that specific terminology and I think that is a correct statement. If not, I would really appreciate a constructive correction.

"Duration" is simply a property of "change". Whether you want to say "result of duration of X" or "result of the colour of X", you're still saying that it is the result of (some aspect of) X. So, yes, you did say that it is the result of change, albeit one property thereof.

I submit that this "naturally occurring" process applies to all changes, everywhere.
That's why I like Tegmark's arguments.

This is not what Tegmark means when he says that the universe is mathematical, though. We've been through that almost ad nauseam. And still here you are with that same strawman.
So I'll leave you to it.

 

[Pinball1970]

and, finally...........FUNGGG!!!, your patience has snapped, thanks to the interminable, stubborn idiocy of Write4U.

Welcome to our world, hahaha.

I like helping people with science questions. I joined Physics Forums partly because my son wanted to read physics at University, so I wanted to join the community in case I could be of use to him, and partly because I wanted find out the best way of learning things like HEP, SR, GR, QED and QFT.

Advice off the bat was Calculus, classical mechanics, linear algebra and pure maths at least to A level. No pop sci, no YouTube just text books.
The expertise and patience of those guys inspired me to stay on and try help with life sciences for students (I did not expect them to have that sub forum)

I am still on the site and still learning.

So, when you meet someone like Write4U on a science site who takes advantage of someone like me who is clearly trying to help, it puts you off the site, or investing any time.

At least I am 100% certain now this person does not want to learn anything.

 

[exchemist]

I like helping people with science questions. I joined Physics Forums partly because my son wanted to read physics at University, so I wanted to join the community in case I could be of use to him, and partly because I wanted find out the best way of learning things like HEP, SR, GR, QED and QFT.

Advice off the bat was Calculus, classical mechanics, linear algebra and pure maths at least to A level. No pop sci, no YouTube just text books.
The expertise and patience of those guys inspired me to stay on and try help with life sciences for students (I did not expect them to have that sub forum)

I am still on the site and still learning.

So, when you meet someone like Write4U on a science site who takes advantage of someone like me who is clearly trying to help, it puts you off the site, or investing any time.

At least I am 100% certain now this person does not want to learn anything.

Yes, I also like helping people and also learning. As I may have mentioned, I’ve actually learned a lot from cranks, over the years. For instance I had a particularly informative detour into Sadi Carnot and the theory of Caloric on another forum, dealing with a free energy crank. Carnot had the idea of caloric as a substance that flowed from high temperature to low temperature, doing work along the way, by analogy with a water mill. That introduced the idea of the inevitability of waste heat, preparing the way for the 2nd law. So I don’t find cranks a waste of time, necessarily, even when, as is usual, they refuse to learn.

But this one is a hopeless case and anything interesting he may once have had to say was said years ago. Now it’s just random stuff off the internet.