Math or Science?
- Thread starter deathlike
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Well maths isn't reliant on science at all really, the only thing maths requires to work is numbers, whereas all of science is built on mathematics. The best way of describing this is to look at a scale of the sciences. Psychology is simply an application of biology, biology is a very specialised field of chemistry, all of chemistry has it's foundation in physics, and physics is the child of maths, I'll let xkcd explain this more succinctly
Rydrum2112
Methodologist
It depends on what you mean by science. In its modern form (most likely how you think about it) math came first. The reason is Galileo: Who laid the foundation for the modern experimental (scientific) method, which is based on conducting tests and observing results. Prior to this innovation, scientific theory was based purely on assumption and supposition.
After him it was probably most influence in its modern form by R. A. FIsher.
I happen to think that anything that qualifies as information is basically abstract. The difference between math and science is that what you find in science must be based off of something that exists in reality; this is not true in math, and it works based on logic. Math is deductive, science is inductive.
Where we come in is technology. Technology requires science, and science requires math, so you actually need both for technology to exist. Science is harder to study without math because the math helps us determine how accurately we can obtain a result, and to decide whether or not to accept a result. But regardless, both of them exist; there was never a point in time where the concept of evolution did not exist; that there are living organisms that exist as a result of evolution helps us discover that fact. Likewise with gravity; (and if there was a point in time where it doesn't exist, then we're simply wrong about it). The fact that we can observe it just helps us discover what actually exists.
Where we come in is technology. Technology requires science, and science requires math, so you actually need both for technology to exist. Science is harder to study without math because the math helps us determine how accurately we can obtain a result, and to decide whether or not to accept a result. But regardless, both of them exist; there was never a point in time where the concept of evolution did not exist; that there are living organisms that exist as a result of evolution helps us discover that fact. Likewise with gravity; (and if there was a point in time where it doesn't exist, then we're simply wrong about it). The fact that we can observe it just helps us discover what actually exists.
A Professor of Chemical Physics, my personal tutor in fact at University, used to describe it as follows. Very simply, he said "Mathematics is the language of science".
Not to open up a can of worms here (and also, because I'm way out of my depth), but it is interesting to consider than up until a few hundred years ago, the branches of science and philosophy were extremely closely linked. Some of the great minds of Greece (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) can all be described as mathematicians, scientists or philosophers. Maybe the distinction between mathematics and science isn't necessary?
Not to open up a can of worms here (and also, because I'm way out of my depth), but it is interesting to consider than up until a few hundred years ago, the branches of science and philosophy were extremely closely linked. Some of the great minds of Greece (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) can all be described as mathematicians, scientists or philosophers. Maybe the distinction between mathematics and science isn't necessary?
Mathematics and science are sort of a duality, really, in the respect that they are equally the same brand of logic and reason. Both are used to figure out just about anything, and both are aspects of base discovery.
Probably the most math based science is physics, because physics is almost entirely fixed on measurement. But math stretches to all subjects as it's needed to contrast, confirm, and consolidate multiple things.
Math is pretty much the purest form of logic, but that doesn't necessarily mean that math is fail proof either. String theory, for example, is a beautiful mathematical construct. But since it does in fact have flaws, the entirety of it could fall apart. Such is the irony of math- one little variable could send the totality of it down the drain.
Nonetheless, where there is a symmetry in math, there is a symmetry for sure. We find ourselves using math as discovery everyday without even realize it, so they both might as well be considered bread & butter, peas & carrots, etc. etc.
Probably the most math based science is physics, because physics is almost entirely fixed on measurement. But math stretches to all subjects as it's needed to contrast, confirm, and consolidate multiple things.
Math is pretty much the purest form of logic, but that doesn't necessarily mean that math is fail proof either. String theory, for example, is a beautiful mathematical construct. But since it does in fact have flaws, the entirety of it could fall apart. Such is the irony of math- one little variable could send the totality of it down the drain.
Nonetheless, where there is a symmetry in math, there is a symmetry for sure. We find ourselves using math as discovery everyday without even realize it, so they both might as well be considered bread & butter, peas & carrots, etc. etc.
Math isn't reliant on actual matter. Numbers itself are, ideas you could say. Science relies on the way things are. Things, which may have not existed in the very beginning of time. So, math existed first in that sense. But since I grew up to believe in Creationism, they would both be existent since the beginning, at the same time.
M1ghty Mous3
CLKWRK
Science is built on theory. Not mathematics.
Mathematics can help explain some stuff in science, but at the end of the day, you cannot prove anything. Simple Example: How do you prove you exist?
I think science came first, because as stated before, science is all about theory. Since you cannot prove anything really, theory is all we can base the world we live in, off of.
While math may be fundamental in physics and chemistry, it isn't necessarily required. You don't need to know math to think of actual physics ideas. You can say that you think this will happen because this is what has happened prior. You do not need to know the speed of an object to know that it is moving. You do not need to know the weight of something to know if something is heavy or not. You compare a feather to a brick, you obviously know which is heavier.
In chemistry, math is pretty much required all the time. If your trying to iodize an acid, you need to know how many electrons of protons to add and subtract, ass well as the process in which to remain safe. This however is not to say that chemistry is fool-proof. For all we know the single electron we see could be 2 separate electrons that are so close that we can not yet determine so. This, does mean though, that everything we know could be all inaccurate.
Say for example your taught that to iodize a base you need to add more electrons. when in actuality you would have to subtract.
What this means is that though people can say science is fact, it is indeed not. Nothing can ever be completely proven in terms of science study. (Do not mistake what i am saying for forensic investigation in Law.)
What I mean to say is, Math can teach us alot about the world we live in. It really can. But at the end of the day, math is a form of science i believe. Because, science at it's core is meant to study the world around us. Math, can be applied to many different aspects. You can count how many chairs are in a room, how to form an acute angle by by-secting it, how to measure perimeter, ect. Math is literally all around us. Math is used in sports, building, eating, exercising, you name it.
But. Science is all around us as well. The way your fingers move because of nerve signals. How long a car will slow down on a rough surface going X- amount of speed. How much thrust is needed to lift a rocket into space.
Math and science go hand in hand. But due to humans nature to wonder and question stuff, I think science came first.
Keep in mind science is all about theory.
This is one of the reasons I love xkcd, they do a good job of making jokes while also making good points about intelligent issues.
The primary basis for the argument presented in that comic is (in my view) the fact that all sciences must be able to manipulate the data they collect in a meaningful way. Whether it's graphing data on a chart or extrapolating to predict possible new outcomes...all of those sorts of manipulation are based on mathematics.
For instance, let's examine Newton's Second Law.
Isaac Newton said:
This law can certainly be confirmed, theoretically, by observation. If you push a small object it accelerates. If you push a big object just as hard, it won't accelerate as much. This is all fine and good, but in order to solve actual problems (and what good is science without that?), mathematics come into play, hence the formula that we often see associated with this law: F=ma.
So, I'd say that science "needs" mathematics to be able to function properly. The "theory" behind each discipline belongs to that body of study; but to be meaningful, math is a necessity.