- April 19th, 2015, 10:01 am
#239865
Conway, precisely so. We remember math books where 10 identical apples are depicted in association with number 10. What if apples are totally different in size, from different trees, ripeness, color, freshness and one of them is poisoned? Then we divide it between 10 kids, and one misfortunate will end up dead, so the answer to a problem would be 1 apple per kid minus 1 kid ( unless responsibility in math does not go farther than just "give, no one forces them to eat apples, even though this is what apples are for). This problem has to have a team of chemists or nutritionists to check safety of the apples. Do we ever have this done before we eat something what looks like apple? No. So yes, answer is 1 apple per kid minus 1 kid, even, to be precise, apples are gone after they are eaten, so answer is 9 live kids, who are happy they had a snack, and very sad about loss of their friend. On of the kids vomits on hearing bad news. So now we have 8 kids who snacked, and one who lost his snack. Time keeps changing the answer. What increment of time the problem's answer is good for? Real life is not happening by math's laws. Only some of it, we should not forget that only some of it, just like short-lived trend in lottery, happens in accordance with math. Math is based on generalisation, detachment from reality, it is like Braille for the blind so they to can enter into the wold of information, have reacher life, more knowledge, but it does not return their ability to see. Braille is as massive and complex as language, but it exists outside of vision. People are handicapped in a face of Universe. They need math to know more, to figure certain set of problems, it's just math does not replace the missing organ, missing ability to see world for what it is. Among blind people there are scientists who, perhaps, are working on solving problem of blindness. The same way in math there must be scientists who, using math, work on actually trying to give people what they do not have, the extra ability to perceive world more efficiently. I consider this to be most honorable path in comparison to simply using math to do what it does.
-- Updated Sun Apr 19, 2015 10:06 am to add the following --
Conway, precisely so. We remember math books where 10 identical apples are depicted in association with number 10. What if apples are totally different in size, from different trees, ripeness, color, freshness and one of them is poisoned? Then we divide it between 10 kids, and one misfortunate will end up dead, so the answer to a problem would be 1 apple per kid minus 1 kid (unless responsibility in math does not go farther than just "give, no one forces them to eat apples, even though this is what apples are for). This problem has to have a team of chemists or nutritionists to check safety of the apples. Do we ever have this done before we eat something what looks like apple? No. So yes, answer is 1 apple per kid minus 1 kid, even, to be precise, apples are gone after they are eaten, so answer is 9 live kids, who are happy they had a snack, and very sad about loss of their friend. One of the kids vomits on hearing bad news. So now we have 8 kids who snacked, and one who lost his snack. Time keeps changing the answer. What increment of time the problem's answer is good for? Real life is not happening by math's laws. Only some of it, we should not forget that only some of life, just like short-lived trend in lottery, happens in accordance with math.
Math is based on generalisation, detachment from reality, it is like Braille for the blind so they to can enter into the wold of information, have reacher life, more knowledge, but it does not return their ability to see. Braille is as massive and complex as language, but it exists outside of vision. People are handicapped in a face of Universe. They need math to know more, to figure certain set of problems, it's just math does not replace the missing organ, missing ability to see world for what it is. Among blind people there are scientists who, perhaps, are working on solving problem of blindness. The same way in math there must be scientists who, using math, work on actually trying to give people what they do not have, the extra ability to perceive world more efficiently. I consider this to be most honorable path in comparison to simply using math to do what it does.