RishiRahul wrote:Rohiniranjan wrote:Dear Rishi,
Thanks for the wiki article on MATH. I read it
Reminiscent of various portals of perceptions that exist for our dear pursuit of astrology, MMMB!
Anyways, the passage is important (from the article):
"Three leading types of definition of mathematics are called logicist, intuitionist, and formalist, each reflecting a different philosophical school of thought.[30] All have severe problems, none has widespread acceptance, and no reconciliation seems possible.[30]
An early definition of mathematics in terms of logic was Benjamin Peirce's "the science that draws necessary conclusions" (1870).[31] In the Principia Mathematica, Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead advanced the philosophical program known as logicism, and attempted to prove that all mathematical concepts, statements, and principles can be defined and proven entirely in terms of symbolic logic. A logicist definition of mathematics is Russell's "All Mathematics is Symbolic Logic" (1903).[32]
Intuitionist definitions, developing from the philosophy of mathematician L.E.J. Brouwer, identify mathematics with certain mental phenomena. An example of an intuitionist definition is "Mathematics is the mental activity which consists in carrying out constructs one after the other."[30] A peculiarity of intuitionism is that it rejects some mathematical ideas considered valid according to other definitions. In particular, while other philosophies of mathematics allow objects that can be proven to exist even though they cannot be constructed, intuitionism allows only mathematical objects that one can actually construct.
Formalist definitions identify mathematics with its symbols and the rules for operating on them. Haskell Curry defined mathematics simply as "the science of formal systems".[33] A formal system is a set of symbols, or tokens, and some rules telling how the tokens may be combined into formulas. In formal systems, the word axiom has a special meaning, different from the ordinary meaning of "a self-evident truth". In formal systems, an axiom is a combination of tokens that is included in a given formal system without needing to be derived using the rules of the system."
Mathematics has, in the same article, been stated as "The Queen of the Sciences". Replace Queen with Mother and I think the statement moves closer to reality and truth! Mathematics is the mother of Sciences and without which the child, aka, science would not have been born, but that does not make Math a science! Though Biblical statements pronounce that the son shall carry (and absolve) the sins of the father, we are now talking about the *mother*! <LOL>
It is not about who is greater, science or math! Remove all science from the world and still MATH shall remain, intact, though as a barren woman! Remove all math from the world and science will become crippled, and turn into superstition, mumbo-jumbo, dare I say, MAGIC and magical thinking?
Sadly, just as some, many, hopefully not most (?) are hell-bent upon to turn astrology and divination into, present august company excepted, naturally! :-(
Science is an unruly child with great potential, but even that wonder-kid requires the culture imparted by its Mother, that gives it logic, language, and strength: MATH!
Lot of folks, and I hope I am not sounding arrogant etc -- confuse between Science and scientific method! Two associated but very different matters! Scientific method and logical approach are more devoutedly embraced by scientists than language lovers (writers, and even more loosely by modern poets, not so much by ancient poets who followed strictly the grammar of poetry, for example our ancient rishis, munis, maharshis, earlier jyotishis who ALL used strict meter when composing Hindu scriptures, including Jyotish!).
Now, LINGUISTS, are another matter! To them language is the object of exploration and I believe they can be called scientists in a sense! So while Language remains closer to MOTHER, Linguists tend to be closer to FATHER SCIENCE!
But, I do not wish to TRY your or anyone else's patience here or there or anywhere!
I TRIED! Now to each his or her own lifeplan, etc...!
Love and Light,
Rohiniranjan
Dada,
Yes, though there is an effort to discuss whether Mats is a Science or not; Strictly speaking it is not a Science; while Physics etc is.
Maths is more of a tool.
RishiRahul
I am glad that you agree with me!
Rohiniranjan