[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

*To*: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>*Subject*: Re: WAS-- Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response*From*: Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>*Date*: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 08:32:53 +1000*References*: <20060623194847.35970.qmail@web50803.mail.yahoo.com>*Reply-to*: dannj@alphalink.com.au*Sender*: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

don ohmes wrote: > > ????-- Just curious here. If math is "not science" (I assume you mean "not > one of the scientific disciplines"), what do you call it? And why? I could see how mathematics could be considered unscientific to a degree. Science attempts to describe (and occasionally explain) real-world phenomena. Mathematics deals with purely abstract conceptual notions. Mathematics does not replicate (let alone precisely describe) real-world phenomena, since real systems aren't comprised of abstract numbers. Instead, mathematics attempts to approximate real systems (with varying degrees of success) based on both observations and assumptions (often more assumptions than observations). I think the biggest failing of mathematics is that in order for it to be of any use in the 'real world', it has to reduce real-world phenomena into numbers. Numbers, of course, don't exist in any real way, so any attempt to quantify something real is more an approximation (no matter how accurate) than a true quantification. In the absence of a better system, however, we're pretty much stuck with mathematics (and its approximations). -- ___________________________________________________________________ Dann Pigdon GIS / Archaeologist http://heretichides.soffiles.com Melbourne, Australia http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs ___________________________________________________________________

**References**:**WAS-- Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response***From:*don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: WAS-- Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response** - Next by Date:
**Re: WAS-- Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response** - Previous by thread:
**WAS-- Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response** - Next by thread:
**Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response** - Indexes: