16 Mar 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasAnd that's the part you should be pay attention to. Math is for the mind, sometimes (most times) we can find applications of it in the real world, but we should never forget that mathematical laws are for objects that don't come by in our everyday life.
Mathematically you can deal with perfect circles. In real life, in nature, there are nothing such as perfect circles.
If you coould do better and better circles you would see that the ratio of it's circumference to it's diamater get's closer and closer to the accepted value of Pi.
Read "The mathematical experience" from reuben fine and ... hersh if you want to start to know something about this and similar subjects.
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by joe shmoIncorrect. A perfect circle exists when a mathematician draws one and says, "That's a perfect circle." Diagrams do not need to be drawn to scale, shape or any other parameter to have a mathematical description, which describes it perfectly.
No matter what you say math can not measure the circumference of a perfect circle because a perfect circle doesn't exist, at least on all scales.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by adam warlockSo your saying perfect circles exist in the natural world, the would have to be the objects with extreme density in space? how could you be sure.
And that's the part you should be pay attention to. Math is for the mind, sometimes (most times) we can find applications of it in the real world, but we should never forget that mathematical laws are for objects that don't come by in our everyday life.
If you coould do better and better circles you would see that the ratio of it's circumference ...[text shortened]... ine and ... hersh if you want to start to know something about this and similar subjects.
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by joe shmoi'm saying that even though most of the times is about pure objects we can apply it in our world. For instance mathematical triangles, the ones with lines with zero thickness, are the most stable geometric figures. And what do you know?! Real triangles with all of its imperfections are very stable too. Perfect circles do not exist in the natural world as far as I know, but that's not an issue here cause math still works.
So your saying perfect circles exist in the natural world, the would have to be the objects with extreme density in space? how could you be sure.
Don't try to complicate what is simple, and try to understand. It seems to me that you already have a natural view on math and that's not going to help you understand it propperly. Try to read the book I told you about.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by adam warlockI'll go pick it up, thanks
i'm saying that even though most of the times is about pure objects we can apply it in our world. For instance mathematical triangles, the ones with lines with zero thickness, are the most stable geometric figures. And what do you know?! Real triangles with all of its imperfections are very stable too. Perfect circles do not exist in the natural world a ...[text shortened]... that's not going to help you understand it propperly. Try to read the book I told you about.
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by joe shmothe book is about the job of matematicians and how they see it. how it evolved and it touches a lot of inportant questions. it's technical of course but very informative and very well written. if you do pick it up tell me what you thought about it.
I'll go pick it up, thanks
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by adam warlockShow me a perfect 4-dimensional hyperspere in nature?
i'm saying that even though most of the times is about pure objects we can apply it in our world.
Those are easily dealt with in mathematics but there are no such things anywhere in universe.
But on the other hand, you said "most of the times", so I'm satisfied with that.
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasnature is three dimensional, spacially talking, so i couldn't show you that. and when i talked about aplications and i didn't meant that the objects in our world are perfect replicas of the objects in mathematical theorems, I meant that even though the objects we face daily are poor replicas of the ones mentioned in a mathematician's work we can still apply their knowledge in our gain.
Show me a perfect 4-dimensional hyperspere in nature?
Those are easily dealt with in mathematics but there are no such things anywhere in universe.
But on the other hand, you said "most of the times", so I'm satisfied with that.
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by adam warlockI think we agree more than we think.
nature is three dimensional, spacially talking, so i couldn't show you that. and when i talked about aplications and i didn't meant that the objects in our world are perfect replicas of the objects in mathematical theorems, I meant that even though the objects we face daily are poor replicas of the ones mentioned in a mathematician's work we can still apply their knowledge in our gain.
Perhaps we just express the same thing in different way.