| I disagree, I say it was invented, prehistoric humans needed to manage supplies too. Thay didnt just hit each other with clubs and pull women by their hair to their caves. They needed a tool to keep track of things so they made it. Same as how humans made up religion to understand things they couldnt explain yet. |
 |
| created by the mind of god, the divine logos? :3 |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
| Do you mean numbers or the concepts? The numbers were invented, but the concepts were always there. They weren't discovered either. It's just instinct. We can recognize multiples of something naturally. The numbers just help us label it. We know putting two things together makes more of that thing. You have more of it. We don't learn that. We are born with it. |
| Math is as abstract as it gets but it serves the purpose of explaining every natural or man-made process. I'd say both, we learned how to interpret it by giving it a "form" |
 |
Revelry said: Mathematics is a tool that allows us to describe nature. Yes, it was "invented" but please don't confuse it with nature. Mathematics is describing nature. But the concepts of nature have always been there. From physics to basic math to calculus. All these things weren't invented. The numbers used to describe them are the only things invented. But these concepts were discovered. They were hashed out by spending countless tries at that formula, or having an apple fall on your head. It comes down to the semantics of what you consider mathematics. Just the numbers? Math is always around us. While I'm typing right now I'm putting down pressure on my keys which would be a specific amount to make them move downwards into the cavity signalling the electrical inputs to travel to my computer at a certain speed via binary to be deciphered and executed to produce a word on my monitor which is resonating light at a certain frequency of flashes and frames for my eyes to receive the light and process it in my brain. Now think about that. Is the math portion just the numbers to describe the pressure on the keys, or the frequency of the lights, or the speed of the electrical input? Or is it something more. The entire concept is math. The numbers can be changed. If 1-9 was changed to 9-1, the numbers would look different, but the concept remains the same. |
| It's discovered |
kitti_fairy4 said: Invented, how the heck would we discover it? From what? What can make us discover math? We INVENTED it! Nu uuh!! the bible says Jose or whatever his name is found a college level math book!! #TRUSTORY |
| |
kitti_fairy4 said: Invented, how the heck would we discover it? From what? What can make us discover math? We INVENTED it! Did we invent time too because we applied a way to depict it? Surely not. |
xEmptiness said: Cause- said: Did we invent time too because we applied a way to depict it? Surely not. Surely maybe. Even physics is shitting itself over why we even need time. That's not the point. The point is if you label something, it doesn't mean you invented it. The idea that was there has always been there. Time, math, space. All these things have always been there even before we came around. Living things have been able to do basic math for the longest time now as I describe in a prior post. The way we use to describe these things is the markings we call "numbers" or "letters". But why do we have to describe something if we invented it? Simply because we didn't invent it. We just invented the way to understand it through a universal way that we agreed on. It's like social interaction. Did we invent communication because we invented the words? Did we invent communication? No. We just made it easier to understand. |
Forum said: discovented |
 |
| The concept is discovered, but the system is invented. Example: The concept of numerals is the discovered concept, while the implementation of it was invented in the form of base-n nominal (base 10 decimal, base 2 binary, base 7 septenary, etc.) |
| The most important things in life is the people that you care about |
xEmptiness said: INSERT POST HERE Creating something is inventing something. We created the system of sequence to explain the concept. We didn't create the concept. We made the rules and the structures to interpret it. When we invent a tool, like a hammer, we create the rules for it's structure. The blueprints. But a hammer doesn't help us explain a concept. It doesn't help us explain why something happens. A hammer is used for a concrete purpose to move another object. Not everything was there since the start of time. The things used to create those things have though. Much like how the concept of math has always been there while the ways we describe math were not. How can new data be invented when that data was there beforehand? All that changed is the use of clever markings on paper to show the data. All you're doing is deflecting into argumentative logic debates instead of wholly explaining how we created the concept of math, and not just the numbers we use to explain math. |
daveOct 21, 2014 1:25 AM
| I offer this question to all who say it's invented. "Did man create all math? If man created math, then all math can be manipulated, and it is whatever we want it to be, right?" |
Post with the computers and stuffs Yes they can be manipulated. They can be changed how they function. How they produce. What they make. The outcome. When you talk about changing math, you cannot manipulate the outcome. You cannot manipulate the results. You just can manipulate the way to explain the results. The means. Not the ends. In computers you can manipulate the ends. You can also manipulate the ends of other things. Cars. Chairs. You can manipulate them. Change their concepts. We invented them so we can do this. I can make a chair that leans further back to support a back more compared to another chair. The results of the chair are different. But I cannot change math by saying putting one thing next to another things makes three of it. No. It is two. No matter what I use to describe the one thing, or the two things, the end result remains the same. The only thing that can be manipulated is the identifications for these things. And that is the part we invented. The only part that we can change. We cannot change the concept that is one thing plus one thing is now two things. Also using informal fallacies such as circular reasoning as a cornerstone of an argument is a formal fallacy of argumentum ad logicam. And formal fallacies are automatically invalid, as informal fallacies can still be valid so long as the opposition provides no concrete dismissal. You still have yet to answer the question, what did we invent about the concept of math? So long as you cannot answer that, the idea that we invented mathematics remains in semantics of "mathematics"'s definition. And semantic arguments are always a waste of time. Plus the whole apple analogy is crossing into "does something exist if we cannot see it?" debate which is irrelevant. How can we see the apples our eyes don't real???? |
daveOct 21, 2014 2:04 AM
| Math, as how we perceive, it was invented. But math has been an indisputable foundation of the universe since the beginning of time. Anyone who says otherwise just doesn't understand. You're overcomplicating it people... |
SinyanOct 21, 2014 2:11 AM
xEmptiness said: Why do you reply by context? it's hard to quote man ;_; Perhaps some of my wording was off. I will give you that. Math is the same as it was 2000 years ago. The concept is the same. Are you going to sit there and tell me that the fundamentals of mathematics have changed overtime? That's absurd. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division have and will always remain the same no matter how many different numbers and letters you throw into a formula. And that is the fundamentals of math. The part that we discovered. The part that have always existed. The part that can never change. The subject matter has expanded on math, but these 4 elements have and will always remain the same. See you can invent a concept for something. Like your computers and your chairs. You invent their concepts. What they do, how they run, their purpose. But the purpose of math has not changed. In fact it's always remained the same. To describe the natural law of the universe. You can take away the universe in it's entirety, and math would still be unchanged. It's a fundamental truth. Are you also implying that we can discover something that doesn't exist? To discover something, it has to exist in the first place. We can invent something that doesn't exist. We can invent the chair and the computer. Sure we can sit on something else, or do our science problems on something else, but these two things are inherently differently. I invent the chair. I use things that already existed in the world to invent it. To make it. To shape it. Is a chair different from a rock you sit on? Yes. Did I discover it? No because the concept of the "chair" didn't exist until I conceived the materials already in existence to form the concept of a "chair". Same could go for your computer. Did we discover the computer? No because computers weren't conceptually around already. Someone had to invent the concept using what they already had available to them. So not everything is already in existence, because the concept of something has to be laid first as groundwork. This is where math in itself is established. Math as it is, is already established. It's everywhere. So again I am saying, we just use numbers and letters and formulas and problems to describe math to us. To make sense of the world around us. Whether you call this "math" is even relative because that word is also something we use to label the concept. Time is in this same category like I said before. We use seconds, minutes, hours, days, years, and so on to describe time. Yet we know the concept of time exists, and the march of time has always existed. Past, present, and future have, are, and will always be real. To say we invented time simply because we tied words to the concept is not rational. We discovered it because it already existed. You can't invent something that already exists. I want you to answer me the simple question. No ace in the hole broad end philosophical arguments to it either like "does it actually exist though?". No pandering to the semantics. No logical argument statures.. Did we invent the concept of math, or just the way to describe math? If we invented the concept of math as it is, and all it's fundamentals, how? And I'm not talking about the definition of math. I'm talking about the application of math. |
daveOct 21, 2014 3:53 AM
| Mathematics is, at its purest level, an abstract system of thought that can be developed without any reference to the natural world. You might consider a "space of all possible ideas", and mathematics would be a subset of this space. Mathematics as we know it (or will ever know it) is a discovery made by explorers of that space. |
| It's discovered we are only discovering the way of universe it's a lot like Archimeds principles or gravity it's there and humans realize what it is. And use it to their advantages. |
 |
| Discovered the universe runs on mathematics. If it didn't there would be no order, no cohesion in anything. We just translated the universal rules into numbers so we can perceive mathematics we certainly didn't invent it. |
 |
| I need to add that, even though the basic concept of mathematics are discovered 'as it is', it does not necessary means that mathematics as a system is not invented by humans. In fact, a lot of abstract concept in complex mathematics are invented logical placeholder of something that either does not exist, or beyond our ability to observe. A simple example would be the usage of 'zero', infinitesimal, imaginary numbers, negative numerals, etc. In these cases mathematics are tools created by humans, not a mere concept of what 'as it is' quality in nature and stands for human greatest intellectual accomplishment. There is no need for dichotomy between the discovery and invention of mathematics, as much as our ability to make names out of things. |
| The most important things in life is the people that you care about |
| Do you have to write this paper in school? @OP |
| My Reviews and Rants: http://bunny1ov3r.wordpress.com/ 痛就是爱 |
| Mathematics is invented and discovered. The natural processes of our mathematics describes the natural but if we had a different natural we would have different mathematics. Also there are many ways to do mathematics that do give the same results. For example there is at least 5 different ways to do multiplication that I know of. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| I think it's a bit of both. A way in which things tie together was discovered and we then invented a way to process that. That's just my 2 cents I haven't actually looked up anythig |
 I can see you |
xEmptiness said: Well, the concept of a computer hasn't changed since we invented one either. It's still a device that is programmed to carries out logical operations. We just made better computers. Same with maths, the basic idea is the same, but we invented more proofs, more theorems and even entire new branches of maths. No. Computers did not inherently exist. We had to put them together and invent them as a single device. They had to be made to do these processes. Created. Math was not created. It was just there. The theorems and branches of math are new ways to use math. Much like how computers have advanced to do more things. But they are not new math. And as the computer advances, it is not a new computer. It's the same computer concept, just it can do more. The difference being one is created, and one is discovered. It comes back to those 4 solid elements of math. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Addition: The put things together to make more. Subtraction: To take things away to make less. Multiplication: To add something by itself for a certain amount of times. Division: How many times one thing fits in another. All these things are used in every theorem or branch of math that exists to date. There is no new elements. They just use different symbols and processes to achieve the goal, but the elements of how they do it via one of these 4 methods is the same. xEmptiness said: I can accept this definition, so let me play with it a bit. A piece of rock can only be discovered. When someone decides you can fling a piece of rock at a person's head and kill them, the "slingshot" was invented. Correct? What have you invented then? The piece of rock or the sticks? Hell no, they were discovered. What you invented was the idea that a rock and sticks can be used to kill people. Using your definition, invention can thus be considered creating the purpose of a previously meaningless existence. In other words, objects can't be invented, only how to use them can. By default all real objects maths tries to explain are real, but applied maths is the process in which these previously meaningless objects are tied together to give a solution. Thus maths is the process and interpretation which gives these objects meaning. Using this line of reasoning, maths must either be invented or be considered the process of invention (at least some inventions) itself. Yes the slingshot was invented when someone put a stick and elastic substances together. It can fling things of a certain weight, a certain distance. But the stick and the elastics weren't just together originally. You had to put them together. They existed as two separate things until you made them interact together for a different purpose. We also invented the use of it. The concept of it. That was the goal. You may have discovered a way to use it, yes, but the invention itself is still intact. Discovering a use can be unintended, but an invention is intended. This is not the correct way to apply it to math because the concept of math wasn't something we came up with by putting things together. Like the elastic and stick, these things worked together and originally existed to make the concept of the slingshot. We didn't invent sticks, we didn't invent rocks. No we just invented their interaction. However with math what did we use to "invent" the use of it? How did we invent addition? Subtraction? Multiplication? Division? What did we put together to make them now exist in a world where their use or combination of uses did not exist prior? Saying we invented these concepts means that before math as a concept, the idea of counting or knowing you have more or less did not exist. xEmptiness said: Both. We invented mathematics, how to describe mathematics, and how to interpret mathematics (metamathematics). We invented mathematics through acknowledging the sanctum of a single unifying perspective, thus brought about pattern from a previously set of meaningless existence.  Consider this image. If the box with the question mark was to be invented through reason, there is only one rational answer. There is a pattern and meaning behind that choice. If the box with the question mark was to be discovered, all four option choices become equally valid. No we just invented how to describe math, and how to interpret math through language. If you take away that language, wouldn't you say that math still exists? I could still do the same things without the language descriptions. That sanctum you mention, that single unifying perspective, is math. It is the sole things that is the same in all aspects of the omniverse. Because even if things like existence were changed, so long as you can differentiate between "how many" using the 4 functions of math, then math exists. You're looking at math simply on paper. You're looking solely at the numbers and letters in math. These numbers and letters are just used to describe and interpret math, like someone else said through base 10 and other medians of interpretation. But all these concepts remain the same in any interpretation. It still remains unchanged from one to another no matter how you label the medians. That is why math has always existed. If I changed 150 to y50, it is the same still. y50 can still represent one hundred and fifty of something. The only thing that has changed is the label for it. But the idea that there is one hundred and fifty of something is still very much real. Even if I changed it to 623, it can still represent the same amount. These are all just labels. We invented that. But we didn't invent the fact that there is still one hundred and fifty of something in existence. Or that when we take away from that one hundred and fifty, there is now less then one hundred and fifty. If we invented the labels to be 9=1, 8=2, and so on until the numbers were inverse like that, math would still work. 9+9=8 then. Because our understandings of math aren't just tied to these labels. |
PerfectScore said: I don't know if you have taken any courses pertaining to abstract algebra, but that's not true. You can have a mathematical system where a * b != b * a (commutativity of multiplication is false). An example of that is with matrices. You may be thinking of real numbers, but there are other algebraic structures to take into consideration which may not even apply the concept of addition or multiplication. With integers, you can't even divide half the time! An algebraic structure that could do what you said above are called fields. Mathematical systems that restrict simply to restrict are not ways to invalidate the existence of the 4 elements. We put a rule on these systems. We say that integers that do not divide evenly cannot be divided. We say that matrices are organized based on a rule that we created. But we know that they can be divided, or organized differently if these rules were removed. Addition: The put things together to make more. Subtraction: To take things away to make less. Multiplication: To add something by itself for a certain amount of times. Division: How many times one thing fits in another. |
daveOct 21, 2014 12:54 PM
| Or you can take historical refuge and quote Kronecker, "God made the integers; all else is the work of man". On a side note, God Created the Integers by Stephen Hawking is a fascinating read, and it may be more fruitful to engage in actual mathematics rather than discuss philosophical trifles, but to each his own. |
| Concept was discovered, the numbers and such were invented. |
 "Everything you see on the internet isn't true." -Abraham Lincoln |
| Just as an anime character is a sort of stylized facsimile of a human being, so mathematics are sort of a stylization of reality's order. As a reflection of reality, to some degree it is discovered, but there is also a bit of creative license involved, so to some degree it is also invented. For example, the number of degrees in a circle is purely arbitrary, as is the term "degrees." We could arbitrarily say that there are 583 plumphlulons in a circle, and we could build a math system based on that if we wanted to. |
| I believe that math was discovered, but the separate parts of it were invented. Yes, every circle has a circumference of 2pir, but somebody had to invent the word circumference and define pi and what a radius is. The world resolves itself into mathematical realities because our invention of numbers and math in general allowed us to discover these realities. |
| I'm siding with Cause- on this one, we didn't 'invent' math as it's always been around, since before man ever came to be. In the beginning of the universe, 1 + 1 is still 2. What we did invent was a way to express mathematics, in numbers and variables and equations, through the use of language. You can't say we invented Math, otherwise you could say we invented Gravity as well. |
euphoriia said: I'm siding with Cause- on this one, we didn't 'invent' math as it's always been around, since before man ever came to be. In the beginning of the universe, 1 + 1 is still 2. What we did invent was a way to express mathematics, in numbers and variables and equations, through the use of language. You can't say we invented Math, otherwise you could say we invented Gravity as well. That conclusion is entirely false. Gravity is a fundamental force. Math is simply the language we use to quantify and describe the world around us. Equating the discovery/invention/whatever of the two is baseless. |
| I think one of the philosophers said that everything in our universe is up for debate, except for maths which is a constant and unchangeable (even some of our laws of physics aren't conclusive because of theories). So I guess you can say it was discovered, because you can't argue against it. |
| Obviously invented. A discovery is something that has always been, but later found. Maths is not physical so we had to invent equations for it to actually work. It's not a discovery if your the first to figure out multiplication, you have to invent it, create it! Maths never existed, so how can it be discovered? |
 |
| I think math is defined as a man-made idea or concept. As such, it was invented and not the latter. Math is something that doesn't exist when there is no one to give it meaning. |
   I envy your delusion; I wish I could live in it  |
| both |
| Kenjataimu mode status: 恒久 |
OnlyEpix said: created by the mind of god, the divine logos? :3 |
| "Let Justice Be Done!" My Theme Fight again, fight again for justice! |
More topics from this board
» What kind of familiar would you like to have irl?Cute_Marseille - 12 hours ago |
6 |
by Cute_Marseille
»»
23 minutes ago |
|
» How important is football in the West?Rally- - Apr 8 |
44 |
by MadanielFL
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Sticky: » General Advice Thread v2 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Fluffygreygrass - Sep 13, 2024 |
269 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» What are you doing right now? ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )-Mayhem- - Dec 25, 2020 |
1804 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Are you a neet or a wagie ( 1 2 )MYZIC - Jul 29 |
57 |
by RunariNoctis
»»
3 hours ago |