Discussion > Is Maths the 'Be All and End All' of Science?
Diogenes
Since thankfully BYG seems to have taken my advice and decided to shut up then I ask you the same question; what reference can you give from any reputable scientist who claims that science is only science if it involves maths?
If you can not find a reference then justify your claim some other way but not just opinion.
Er um, who exactly claimed that Philately was a science?
Dung
Diogenes
Do you believe that Philately would become a science if we could find a way to use maths in its study? ^.^
Dung
I never post on the weekend.
Dung, forget everything I have said, you were correct all along.
TheBigYinJames
Can't help but admire a man who knows when he's met his match.
Martin A
Mrs Yin applied her internet-argument philosophy, and after a time I concurred.
It goes like this. Imagine your opponent died suddenly at their desk. Then imagine their son, or next-of-kin looking through their papers, sad and wistful, wondering how their dearest relative was spending their last couple of weeks.
Then they discover their dearest relative was arguing with someone online about absolute nonsense.
Her philosophy is that if you're doing something that your next-of-kin would consider a tragic waste of your final days, then stop doing it.
TheBigYinJames
Yes.
And, on the same theme, when I am on my deathbed and my children ask me "Dad, looking back, what things do you now wish you had done?", I am quite sure that I will not answer "Well, I did many interesting and rewarding things in my life, but I really wish now that I had watched more television".
Martin A
Before crowing too loudly over your perceived victory, Dung, perhaps you should seriously consider TBYJ’s main question: can you name one science that does NOT involve mathematics? I am sure that you will find that you will share with the 8 out of 10 cats who will not be able to answer that….
Radical Rodent
Dung, requiring a reference is like asking for a peer reviewed paper before an opinion is worthwhile. I gave an anecdote from your God, Feynman. Popper and Kuhn give different versions of the scientific method. Which do you prefer and why? Feynman's version is somewhere in between. It seems self evident to me, not a member of MENSA, why are you named after the Latin for table if you are all not as thick as a plank of wood? Progress in the sciences involves finding relationships that can be expressed mathematically. Otherwise chemistry would still be studying reactions rather than continuing and deepening the physicist Moseley's research into x ray diffraction patterns... Etc as in my post that you ignored because of your superior IQ
Diogenes
Radical Rodent
I have not crowed over any victory and if I did then it was unintentional, I can say that with total honesty since I did not believe for one second that BYJ had in any way admitted defeat.
I thought I had answered the question you have now asked but if not I will try again. I have already said that I believe mathematics is used almost universally to explain, develop and communicate science. However I do not believe that many if any sciences had their origins in mathematics, I believe their origins lay in a spark/question formed in the human mind. The questions (if verbalised) would have been " what just happened, why did it happen, how did it happen?" Mathematics is not involved in the formation of those questions in the human mind. Without those questions the science does not exist.
Dung
… I do not believe that many if any sciences had their origins in mathematics…but then, neither does TBYJ. All he has really said is that all science depends upon mathematics; without the rationality that mathematics provides to the observations made, there can be no science.
Radical Rodent
Diogenes
I only mentioned my certificates from MENSA because I was sick of being told that my opinion was worthless if not supported by a degree qualification. That situation does not usually happen on BH but BYJ made it a big part of his arguments, what would you do; roll over and surrender?
BYJ made statements as if they were facts and brooked no discussion, I wanted to know if they were just opinions or if they were statements by others and had some scientific or logical basis so I asked him.
Dung
Oh, and if you want to resort to the support of your IQ measurement, as supplied by Mensa, I, too, can out-point most people, there, being in the top 1%, with an IQ of 155. However, I am aware that there is a big difference between being intelligent and being clever – I have met very intelligent people who were very stupid, and met less intelligent people who were very clever.
Radical Rodent
Mar 14, 2016 at 9:59 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent
TBYJ said he hated it when I questioned the meaning of words and yet here we are again quite possibly arguing over the meaning of words :)
I believe that the science begins when the human mind asks the question and I believe that maths is a big part of the process of answering those questions, TBYJ did not believe that.
RR my best score was 150 so you beat me hehe, as I said above I only mentioned it because TBYJ kept rubbing my nose in my lack of a degree. both 150 and 155 would be described by MENSA as being on the 99th percentile ie more intelligent than 99% of the population so congratulations mate ^.^
You might be interested to know that whatever our careers; our IQ scores were higher than Steven Hawking hehe.
Dung
I only mentioned it because TBYJ kept rubbing my nose in my lack of a degree
That was Raff I was doing that to... unless you're admitting to sockpuppetry now. It would explain his sudden allegiance with you.
Dung, you seem determined to be the most stupid person on the 'Hill, so who am I to keep a man from his dream.
TheBigYinJames
Respect to the tall Scottish gentleman for a truly effective nolo contendere...
osseo
Oh dear, Dung, clearly you have ignored all the posts that show that what separates science from stamp collecting is the application of maths. Why still continue to dig your hole?