Llama Su wrote: Math is not a science?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics#Mathematics_as_science
Wow, are you kidding me? Have you even read that paragraph yourself? It actually says how much of a dispute it is that it is science and keeps mentioning that whenever anyone goes on to define science, math is at best marginally included. If you look up Wikipedia's article on science, btw, it ammends the definition of discipline of knowledge acquisition (it puts it in more words) with " in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe." which is exactly what I always assert science is. And math is nothing like that. I appreciate you trying to find something to support your position but at least make an effort to read what you quote first, because I certainly do. For I actually hope to learn that I'm wrong so I can correct myself.
Truth is not subjective?
No, it isn't. Any truth of any matter is exclusively bound by that matter itself, which, since it is not us, is thus not dependant on sentient subjects to describe it.
E=mc2 this was not discovered?
It was. To math however, c, E, and m however are unknowns, whereas to physics they represent a constant and two measurable variables. It just so happens that this mathematical description is capable of making remarkably accurate predictions about our world, though that discovery is scientific in nature and not mathematical.
So you invented created or "discovered" this formula to prove the contradictory state of infinity?
You go ahead and read up on what a contradiction actually is and how it is used in the formal proof structure that is a "proof by contradiction". I don't need to invent what math has defined, and I am free to use it as I please so long as I stay within its rules. What I do not understand however is what you mean by "contradictory state of infinity", nor why you keep asserting that this is something I postulated nor how you dare continuing doing so even after I have explained myself and ontop of that offered to explain it to you in more detail in private if you are still having trouble understanding but care to understand.
Oh, and while I'm ranting, I'd like to ask you to demonstrate to me by any means at your disposal that a claim is more true for having been stated by somebody else earlier or that it is less true if it happens not to have been stated before. I'm smelling a fallacy.
I can make up formulas too...
I choose to not need to, in this equation...
Well, I saw two wrong ones, you asked why I said they were wrong, I answered. Its not that I needed to. I just thought you cared. I'm sure Alex did.
Without proof of this, your amazing point is void!
Proof of what?
Infinity is void...
If you say so. Once you have defined void, I'd love seeing you "come up" with a "formula" to prove this, if you can. Not that formulas are proofs, but oh well, you already think my proof was a formula, so I might as well go ahead and use your wording.
You going to prove void with void?
Nope, I ain't. You know why? Because I don't know what you mean by "void" and there is therefore no way I could possibly address it unless you defined the term.
Post a link of reference so I may back up your claim.
Which claim? And why is it that the credentials of the one who makes the argument are more important to you than the actual argument in assessing its validity and soundness? I don't know if anyone had made the proof I gave before. I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty similar and other proofs of that point if you just care to use the freakin magic of google. Alternatively you could do three months worth of math at any local college if you're so eager to know. I give you credit for disbelieving what you don't understand, that's actually a good thing. Though it is not my job to teach, my offer to explain still stands. I won't however use google in your stead. I have my own questions to seek answers to.
I see no evidence.
Math doesn't operate on evidence. Sciences do. Math operates on logic. And yes, I think you have made it clear that you don't see it. Again, if you care to, make an effort to find out. There is no way it can harm you. Worst case scenario would be that you learn that somebody else was wrong.
Your math is right and exact to you, for you...
There is no such thing as "my math". There is math. I'm either using it or I am not. If I am not, please show me where exactly is the mistake. I made a claim, was challenged, and responded. You're still just making claims. And neither is there such a thing as "right for you". If something is true it is true regardless of who views it and regardless of whether that perceiver accepts it as true. Conversely, something false is also false independant of anyone seeing it as such. This counts to both scientific and mathematical postulates which is why there is a dispute as to whether math is a science in the first place. Esoteric truths, for instance, are subjective.
As is "mine".
"Yours" may be right and exact in its own regard, but its not math. I could say if it was correct or incorrect if you provided any sort of argument or proper postulate at all. In the meantime, I have no choice but to dismiss it because whenever I ask you for clarification you just ignore my inquiry while I do what I can to respond to each and every inquiry you make. Now obviously nothing obliges any of us to communicate with each other. But if we shall choose to, please try and make it less one-sided, if you can. Maybe Khaos' points on your last lines illustrates the problem we're having somewhat...
