Vort Posted April 28, 2015 Author Report Posted April 28, 2015 By logic, as you had this discussion with mathematicians, there are 2 conclusions... that 1.) these mathematicians are doofuses or 2.) you misunderstood their sentiments when all they really wanted to say was that they do not trust the assumption of perfect logicians (as is applicable in the real world) so they have to account for error. To be fair, they were not mathematicians, just people with an interest in mathematics and puzzles. But what struck me was the stark disconnect between seeing a mathematical proof and being unable to apply that proof to a real-world situation. It's not that people are imperfect, but that the line of reasoning itself fails when taken from a mathematical abstraction and applied to an actual situation. The mind boggles. Quote
Guest Posted April 28, 2015 Report Posted April 28, 2015 To be fair, they were not mathematicians, just people with an interest in mathematics and puzzles. But what struck me was the stark disconnect between seeing a mathematical proof and being unable to apply that proof to a real-world situation. It's not that people are imperfect, but that the line of reasoning itself fails when taken from a mathematical abstraction and applied to an actual situation. The mind boggles. I understand what you're saying. I think this stems from people's mental conditioning that simple mathematical solutions (yes, this counts as simple) can't apply to real world problems because of real world complexity... think Deflategate... Quote
Crypto Posted April 28, 2015 Report Posted April 28, 2015 Nah. Logicians use that tool for proof by contradiction :)It's not proof by contradiction, if A=/=A is not seen as an contradiction but instead as an axiom of the value of a number.It's a change in the rules. Quote
Vort Posted April 28, 2015 Author Report Posted April 28, 2015 It's not proof by contradiction, if A=/=A is not seen as an contradiction but instead as an axiom of the value of a number. If your axioms include A =/= A, your symbolic representation is meaningless and you cannot communicate any useful ideas. Quote
Crypto Posted April 28, 2015 Report Posted April 28, 2015 If your axioms include A =/= A, your symbolic representation is meaningless and you cannot communicate any useful ideas.Exactly! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.