Is math discovered or developed?

[Salvijus]

0 exists indipendent of human experience actually.

And oneness exists indipendent of human interpretation.

0 is the only real number, and zero can be called 1. 

We can say existence is absolute 1oneness without using our mind. And we can find that 0 is the source of existence.

But to become self aware, to become aware of oneness, to recognize zero as zero, some sense of duality has to exist for oneness to recognize itself. And there duality was born, yin and yang was born. And out of duality all other numbers came.

Therefore mathematics is in existence irrelevent of human experience. ?

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

Little bit of explanation to clarify what was sayed above.

If we entered a state of zero interpretation and mind activity. We'd still know we exist. We'd exists either as nothing or as everything. That's why number 0 and 1 are fundamental.

Also there're 2 dimensions of life, yin and yang, positive and negative, permenant and impermenant, relative and absolute. That gives a sense of duality and contrast, and all other numbers come from this. (Ultimately yin and yang are one, and also two at the same time, it's confusing, no need to go there)

Therefor numbers are part of existence quite fundamentally

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[UnbornTao]

1 hour ago, Salvijus said:

0 exists indipendent of human experience actually.

Where?

[Salvijus]

22 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Where?

Zero is eternal nature of existence actually. Nothingness is the source of all things. Nothingness is one thing that can't be eliminated from existence. It never comes and never goes. 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[zurew]

8 hours ago, Salvijus said:

What about math then? Can i invent new math every day?

In theory, you could. Math is a language/tool that describes reality, it has its own rules and axioms.

Without inventing those axioms, math couldn't really exist as we know it. Now, that doesn't mean, that those axioms are completely abritrary, but on the otherhand, they had to be invented. But this could strengthen your position, because you could say that you don't necessarily have to use math to recognize those patterns, because in theory you could use other tools or languages to recognize the underlying patterns.

8 hours ago, Salvijus said:

For example physics is not an invention because if it were i could just invent new laws every day.

This is not a good argument. Just because something is an invention, that wouldn't automatically mean, that you could easily invent new forms of it every day. Could Apple invent a new iphone every day? If it can't, would that mean that iphone is not an invention?

But ultimately, i think i agree with your poisition. There is an underlying fact of the matter that is described, using math. Math is a tool to help us to recognize certain patterns in reality. Math as a language is invented, but what its describing is not invented.

 

[Salvijus]

29 minutes ago, zurew said:

Math as a language is invented, but what its describing is not invented.

Yea, i was trying to say this also.

29 minutes ago, zurew said:

For example physics is not an invention because if it were i could just invent new laws every day.

I think u misunderstood the statement here. I meant laws of physics can't be invented. Nobody can invent gravity. We can only discovere it and describe it using the language of math. So it's a discovery. I think it's solid argument. (Or maybe i misunderstood smth idk )

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

What about math then? Can i invent new math every day?

 

1 hour ago, zurew said:

In theory, you could. Math is a language/tool that describes reality, it has its own rules and axioms.

What i tried to say here is that no new rules can be invented in math. Math has only one rule. To be logical. It's a language of logic. 1+1=2 is logical. If 1+1=3, then it's no longer math. No math exists like this. That's why i sayed no new math can be invented. 1=1 is the only math possible.

That's why all alien civilizations would arrive at the same math equations. And if somebody understand math in human world, he would understand math in alien world except that symbols would be different. Kinda proves that math and the laws of logic are universal (For now i think this makes sense to me)

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[zurew]

9 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

I meant laws of physics can't be invented.

I agree with this statement, I just didn't agree with the justification you used to strengthen that point, but ultimately i agree with physics is not being invented, but discovered.

 

[UnbornTao]

1 hour ago, Salvijus said:

 

Isn't this basically falling into the trap of confusing the model for reality?

[Salvijus]

22 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

 

Isn't this basically falling into the trap of confusing the model for reality?

I can't see the quote that you're commenting on.

[Salvijus]

@UnbornTao i mean in a sense yes, reality can't be described by any model, symbols, concepts etc. But that point of view blows out absolutely everything. U can use the same argument to deny the discoveries of laws of physics. A smart ass guy could say gravity is just a concept and all concepts are inventions. There is no such thing as invention or discovery. Nothing ever happens, there's just what is, beyond any concepts etc.

Im failing to explain why, but there's something wrong when people use absolute perspective to deny the relative. It's just not fair ? and inappropriate in this topic imo.

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

Stages of ego development in phychology is a model. But it's a model based on observation of reality, it's a discovery that was made by observation. Similary mathematics is a created model that was created by observing reality imo.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Salvijus

[UnbornTao]

@Salvijus OK, fair enough. I can see where you're coming from.

Math is a discovery created by humans.

Appreciate it.

[Salvijus]

@UnbornTao :)

[DefinitelyNotARobot]

What is mathematics other than a language we use to describe certain patterns within reality? I'd say that we discover the patterns and invent the tools to describe them, though it's also gotten to a point where the tools have taken on a life of their own and are now being used beyond mere descriptions of physical reality, but are also used to construct an entirely new mathematical reality. The problem is that we can't certainly say how much of this purely mathematical reality actually applies to physical reality and how much of it is just it's own thing, so we can't tell what parts of it are "discovered" and what parts are "constructed". I guess at a certain point the notions between discovery and construction just break apart.