Timeline for Do contingent propositions about the world rely on the consistency of mathematics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 20, 2023 at 23:17 | answer | added | GONZALO ROCHA DE LA CRUZ | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 20, 2023 at 23:04 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Dec 21, 2023 at 4:27 | |||||
| Dec 20, 2023 at 4:18 | answer | added | J D | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 23:45 | answer | added | edelex | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 15:32 | answer | added | Kristian Berry | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 14:47 | comment | added | Michael Carey | Mathematics must be consistent because otherwise it's completely worthless. Maybe, in the future we'll find uses for incosistent frameworks, but I doubt it. Even if the world was inconsistent, we would want our mathematics to be consistent. Besides, I don't even see how the world could be inconsistent, how would we know it's inconsistent VS our laws of physics being wrong? | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 14:45 | comment | added | Michael Carey | If we found a contradiction in math, then the goal would be to find a different structure, that doesnt have such a contradiction and call that math instead. It could also be the case that the world is inconsistent; and we just happen to be experiencing a seemingly consistent fragment of it. You are talking as if, mathematics is a completed field, and finding an error would be disastrous. Mathematics is ever changing and fluid, we still don't know what Axioms are appropriate to build it with. Finding an inconsistency, just means those particular axioms were poorly chosen. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 9:01 | comment | added | Mauro ALLEGRANZA | If we find a contradiction in math, this means that some of our mathematical theories is wrong, but this will not affect the "facts" of the world: mutual gravity still attracts. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 8:57 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 7 characters in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 8:00 | answer | added | Jo Wehler | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 4:23 | comment | added | Alex | @user4894 a current foundational theory for maths? Maybe. But who knows, maybe bridges don't fall down because there really are no contradictions (mathematical ones being just one kind) in the world. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 4:10 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:57 | answer | added | kuro | timeline score: 3 | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:52 | comment | added | user4894 | Bridges will not fall down if math is found to be inconsistent. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:45 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 39 characters in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:41 | comment | added | Alex | But can't one help but use classical logic while reasoning about quantum phenomena? | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:36 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 74 characters in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:11 | comment | added | Alex | @nwr I have paraphrased the question. Let me know if I need to elaborate. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:08 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 3:04 | comment | added | nwr | It is not clear to me what you are asking. Do you believe that the objects of the world are mathematical entities? Do the elementary particles of the standard model compute their evolution in time? It seems a bit of a stretch. We use mathematics to approximate the physical world, but to suggest that the two are identical seems implausible. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 2:49 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 57 characters in body
|
| Dec 19, 2023 at 2:44 | comment | added | Kristian Berry | There's not just "one" mathematics to be consistent or inconsistent, though. | |
| Dec 19, 2023 at 2:43 | history | edited | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 127 characters in body
|
| S Dec 19, 2023 at 2:33 | review | First questions | |||
| Dec 19, 2023 at 8:05 | |||||
| S Dec 19, 2023 at 2:33 | history | asked | Alex | CC BY-SA 4.0 |