Closer To Truth: Mathematics Revisited

There is an ongoing PBS TV series (additionally, numerous books and an internet site) called “Closer to Truth.” Neuroscientist Robert Lawrence Kuhn hosts it. He’s featured in one-on-one interviews and panel discussions with the cream of trendy cosmologists, physicists, philosophers, theologians, psychologists, and so forth on all the Big Questions surrounding a trilogy of extensive topics – Cosmos, Consciousness, and Meaning. The trilogy collectively treated truth, space and time, thoughts and focus, extraterrestrial beings, theology, etc. Here are a few more of my feedback on one of the general subjects, including mathematics.

Is Mathematics Eternal?

# The variety of capacity equations is as close to limitless as makes no odds. But handiest a relative few replicate our fact (anything that is). What role do the others play? For instance, an inverse cube law or electricity equals mass models of the velocity of light (no longer squared)?

Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered?

# The idea that seven instances six equals 40- (7 x 6 = forty-two) is best genuine due to the fact we all agree on that being the case, just like we will and do all agree that a twenty greenback bill a relative few ($20) is well worth twenty dollars even though the unique paper it is published on is probably well worth or have valued most effective twenty cents. So we agree on that equation, too – a twenty-greenback bill equals twenty bucks. But, if all of a sudden the majority of the population said that seven instances six do now not equal 42; however, say 24, then that might be the case, and seven imodelssix could now not equal forty-two.


The same applies to corporate money. If all of a sudden all shopkeepers stated, your twenty-dollar invoice turned into only well worth twenty cents, well, twenty cents it shall be. Thus, mathematics and mathematical equations are ruled with close to absolute majority settlement or consensus. For this reason, arithmetic is an invention that does not exist in any experience of fact outside of that consensus. In seven instances, six equals 40-two or seven models, six is no longer the same fourth – neither exists a widespread truth aside from what we together decide via agreement is the case.

# I gather one specific arithmetic within the English (French, Chinese, German, something) language. Ine Plus One Equals Two is as valid as 1 + 1 = 2. So, arithmetic is a subset or a sub-part of the English (French, Chinese, and so on.) language, and people languages are used for all subjects. Of course, mathematics, written out or in image shape, is not just physics and the sciences.

I bet part of the normal, proper human Universe is using arithmetic to make your profits tax return and household budget and figuring out at the grocery store what emblem of the product is the most inexpensive per-unit amount.

English isn’t widespread, French isn’t always conventional, and Chinese is not regularly occurring. However, Englishmen and Frenchmen, and Chinamen might agree that 1 + 1 = 2 is familiar, whether expressed in symbols or letters, hieroglyphics, or characters. Even the “Greys” would possibly concur that 1 + 1 = 2. However, is mathematics universal earlier than any aware minds had been conceived of in Mother Nature’s philosophy? Did 1 + 1 = 2 exist in any form, manner, or shape nanoseconds after the Big Bang?

# Clearly, some standards can not be expressed mathematically, like Beauty or Wednesday; that’s why I advised that the language of arithmetic is a subset of a few broader languages – like English, French Ch, Chinese, or Klingon. There are probably trillions of thoughts expressed in English, simply several which contain arithmetic.

By “widespread language,” I imply mathematics might be the initial way we will begin to speak with an extraterrestrial intelligence anywhere throughout the Universe. We probably have Euclidean Geometry, mathematics, Pi, and so on down the line is not unusual. One would count on that one and simplest immediate line that can be part of two points on a flat surface, which would remain true everywhere in our galaxy and Universe.

That might be generic. If all of an unexpected you noticed etched or carved into the Martian floor the conventional pictorial illustration of a Pythagorean Triangle, you would realize that a non-human intelligence did the etching or carving wave that something in the commonplace that might kick-begin verbal exchange off.

# This might be overly simplistic, but discoverable matters had actual life or reality before many life forms developed from non-living structures and substances, especially lifestyles paperwork with minds with self-cognizance, awareness, intellect, reasoning competencies, etc. Now, even as Jupiter probably failed to exist before intellectual existence forms evolved in the Universe, the stuff that makes up Jupiter did. Jupiter consequently became discoverable, hence observed, no longer invented.

Invented things had no actual lifestyles or reality before the evolution of lifestyles paperwork, particularly bureaucracy with the mind. Those created things are both physical things that by no means might have come to pass without an intellect to conceive and subsequently manufacture them like coffee makers, in addition to ideas (like language and mathematics and logic and splendor) that non-highbrow items (like Jupiter) could in no way, ought to by no means, invent.

The Great Red Spot on Jupiter is unaware of coffee makers and calculus! Calculus was invented through intellect, and a few remember it as lovely. As soon as something is created, then that something can, in turn, be observed. You failed to develop calculus and probably did not create the coffee maker, but you discovered both due to someone else’s mind. But my bottom line is that if there may be no reason in the cosmos and by no means has been, then there would be no calculus and no espresso makers.

# Maybe other dictionaries are extraordinary to mine. However, my dictionary defines “invent” or “invention” along the traces of “to supply or create with the creativeness” or “the workout of imaginative or creative power.” “Inventor” is “a person who invents.”

Now, the cosmos is much stuff to many human beings. Still, except everyone wants to return to the idea of Panpsychism, I alternatively doubt that the cosmos has an energetic “imagination” or “ingenious… Strength” and tthat the cosmos is not a “man or woman.” The act of invention seems to be planned, one that calls for intellect.

Natural evolution is not directed; it is not aim-oriented. Mother Nature didn’t dictate to the cosmos,” Let there be humans.” The artificial choice, then again, is required; it is goal-oriented. Humans (now not Mother Nature) say, “Let there be a bionic ear”,; Permitt there be capsules that permit humans to live longer and more healthy”,; Permitt there be dressmaker babies without a start defects”; and Permitt, there be robots with ‘synthetic intelligence’ that could vacuum the carpets and robotic ‘pets’ which could provide consolation to the sick and elderly in establishments.”

Thus, I advocate something along those strains: In the absence of the herbal evolution of life forms on Earth, rocks and minerals and water (in single or extra states) existed, awaiting to be observed when (and if) existence might stand up and evolve on Planet Earth. Without the natural evolution of lifestyles, bureaucracy on Earth, calculus, and coffee makers would no longer exist. These summary ideas had to wait for the starting place and exchange of existence oon Planet Earth to invent them. No lifestyles: rocks, minerals, and water exist. No life: calculus and coffee makers do now not elive

Mathematics has advanced, but handiest inside an intellectual capacity. Ancient people migrating out of Africa 70,000 years ago probably did not realize much more than bone-head mathematics. The historic Greeks brought geometry. However, they did not recognize calculus. Calculus came later, and arithmetic remains evolving to human intellect and inventiveness.

# If flesh-and-blood human beings are part of nature, and who can argue against that announcement (aside from a few far proper-wing religious fundamentalists), then anything humans produce, or evolve into, or are outmoded via – cyborgs or androids or artificially sensible robots – should also be a part of the natural scheme of factors. No problem there.

However, I nbject to the phrase that nature “invented” the inventors. Why no longer drop the term “invented” and say that nature is an advanced invention? Again, “invented” implies a selected course or intention that nature intended from the get-move. I preserve that everyone might be difficult-pressed to pin a “goal” on nature, except if you equate nature as synonymous with a deity or deities.

# As long as arithmetic has developed inside the intellect’s confines by highbrow beings (human beings or different self-conscious entities along with extraterrestrial intelligence, even synthetic intelligence), it is high-quality. I’d have a tough time adapting to the belief that arithmetic evolved from mathematics to geometry, for this reason, set theory and calculus, fractals, and so on—all between the Big Bang event and the beginning of the first life forms.

# Many elements existed earlier than intellectually derived arithmetic, which presently describes things like orbits, collisions, and velocities. All of which increases an interesting query. Only one form of neurological chemistry can discover and invent things.

There are dozens of other sorts of chemistries like soil chemistry, cooking chemistries, inorganic chemistries, natural chemistries, biochemistries, mineralogical chemistries, metallurgy, petrochemical chemistries, pharmaceutical chemistries, digestion, photosynthesis, nuclear chemistries, and so on.

All kinds of chemical actions and reactions occur 24/7/52, including endothermic and exothermic reactions. Yet, only one sort of chemistry finally ends up: understanding, expertise, discovering, and inventing. That’s a profound line in the sand between the chemistry of the mind and the chemistries of everything else.

Internet practitioner. Twitter expert. Analyst. Communicator. Thinker. Coffee advocate.
Spent a year testing the market for sock monkeys in Naples, FL. My current pet project is donating robotic shrimp in Hanford, CA. Spent several months getting my feet wet with weed whackers worldwide. Spent 2001-2006 training shaving cream in Hanford, CA. Crossed the country lecturing about bathtub gin in West Palm Beach, FL. Spent 2001-2007 implementing licorice with no outside help.