Mathematics Definition
Paulo J. Matos
Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
Best regards,
--
Paulo J. Matos : pocm(_at_)rnl.ist.utl.pt
Instituto Superior Tecnico - Lisbon
Software & Computer Engineering - A.I.
- > http://www.rnl.ist.utl.pt/~pocm
---
Yes, God had a deadline...
So, He wrote it all in Lisp!
Zdislav V. Kovarik
Paulo J. Matos <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
:Hi all,
So you want something entertaining, witty, or cynical?
Many times, when I reveal to people that I teach Mathematics,
they roll their eyes and exclaim "Oh, Math was my worst subject
in school!"
Whereupon I reply: "Well, it's a dirty job, but someone's
gotta do it."
If you want a thorough answer (with which mathematicians
may or may not agree), read "Set Theory" in the Bourbaki
collection "Elements of Mathematics". They spend tens of
pages building "sets" and "structures", and then they say
that Mathematics is a study of those structures.
Good luck, ZVK(Slavek).
Steve Leibel
kov...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (Zdislav V. Kovarik) wrote:
>
> If you want a thorough answer (with which mathematicians
> may or may not agree), read "Set Theory" in the Bourbaki
> collection "Elements of Mathematics". They spend tens of
> pages building "sets" and "structures", and then they say
> that Mathematics is a study of those structures.
>
If they said that, they must have been trolling. They are mistaking the
map for the territory. In opposition, one could argue that mathematics
is the study of mathematical objects: numbers, collections,
arrangements, and so forth. Sets and structures in fashion at any given
time are not the primary objects of study. If you use category theory
instead of set theory to study the natural numbers, are you no longer
doing math?
This of course is just the old argument about whether math is discovered
or invented; whether there really is a set of natural numbers, or if we
made it up.
My point is that Bourbaki clearly understands this argument, and that
they are choosing sides, and that they are intending to provoke other
mathematicians of the day to respond in opposition.
G. A. Edgar
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Best regards,
Mathematics is the science of patterns. See:
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716760223/>
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198236085/>
--
G. A. Edgar http://math.ohio-state.edu/~edgar/
Jim Ferry
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
I remember a teacher saying this,
Mathematics is the study of structure and the mappings
which preserve that structure.
This seems equivalent to saying,
Mathematics is the study of categories.
Of course, this might lead one to say,
Mathematics is the study of categories, and the functors
that . . .
But I don't think it's a good idea to try to fit all of
mathematics in the Procrustean bed of category theory.
Because here's another definition:
Mathematics is an angel.
(You said "interesting", and although you also said
"definition" you got half, anyway).
An angel is half man, half God:
1) Mathematics will always have a messy component, enmeshed
in the messy affairs of man, where it will be called upon to
settle certain petty disputes, improve a widget, streamline
the geometries of various sexual practices (e.g., impalement,
dimidiation, quartering).
2) But it will also extend continuously to ever more abstruse
realms of pure thought. There may exist a final theory of
physics, in which case the he-man frontiersman/physicist will
give way to the boring analog of today's fluid dynamicist,
who can say that turbulence is an unsolved mystery, but who,
when pressed, will be forced to admit that its mystery is one
of mathematics, not physics. On the other hand, there can't
be a final theory of mathematics. It might be possible that
a sufficiently advanced being would consider all mathematical
endeavors pointless and trivial, but it's hard to conceive of
what that would mean: we tend to dismiss problems as pointless
and trivial if we can see how to do them in principle, but, if
we believe Godel, there is no way to create a package called
"all of mathematics" and dismiss all problems it poses as
"doable in principle".
Feh.
Owen Holden
"Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote in message
news:20020531.200231...@mega.ist.utl.pt...
William C Waterhouse
"Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
>...
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
The opening sentence of the paper "Linear Associative Algebra,"
by Benjamin Peirce (American J. Math. 4 (1881), 97-229) is:
"Mathematics is the science which draws necessary conclusions."
William C. Waterhouse
Penn State
Fred Galvin
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting
> definition, maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
It sounds like you're looking for a humorous definition. There is a
book called "The Dictionary of Humorous Definitions" or something like
that; you might look there. The straight definition: Mathematics is
the science of quantity, number, and space.
Herman Rubin
>Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
>I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
>maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
I have read that Bertrand Russell defined it as the
study of all propositions of the form P implies Q.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Dirk Van de moortel
"Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote in message news:20020531.200231...@mega.ist.utl.pt...
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
My brother-in-law had a university maths prof who started his
first lecture with:
"Mathematics is the Whore of Science"
Dirk Vdm
Jonathan Miller
>In article <20020531.200231...@mega.ist.utl.pt>, Paulo J.
>Matos <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
>>I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
>>maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>
>Mathematics is the science of patterns.
>
That's my favorite definition.
Jon Miller
David Kastrup
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
Biology is dirty Chemistry.
Chemistry is dirty Physics.
Physics is dirty Mathematics.
Mathematics is dirty.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: David....@t-online.de
Leroy Quet
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Best regards,
Here are two musings of mine from a thread posted back in very early
2001:
(http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&threadm=gc48eqx1jq43%40forum.mathforum.com&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dmathematics%2Bgroup:sci.math%2Bauthor:Quet%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26scoring%3Dr%26selm%3Dgc48eqx1jq43%2540forum.mathforum.com%2)
(There are some interesting replies there too.)
"I know mathematics is a maze.
But it is a maze without end.
It is a maze where goals shift
And directions change.
It is almost impossible,
If it is not impossible,
To climb upon its walls
And view everything whole."
"Actually, mathematics is, in a way, a type of poetry.
Numbers and symbols are its words.
Identities and equations are its metaphores."
Also, I think of mathematics as an art, not just a science.
Here's an interesting thread on this and other definitions of math:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&frame=right&th=e29ed710574df722&seekm=wxon9qajzmn5%40forum.swarthmore.edu#link1
Thanks,
Leroy Quet
David C. Ullrich
<po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
>I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
>maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
I'm not the first person to suggest that the real definition
is that mathematics is that which mathematicians do.
(Um, it's what they do when they're doing mathematics...)
>Best regards,
>--
>Paulo J. Matos : pocm(_at_)rnl.ist.utl.pt
>Instituto Superior Tecnico - Lisbon
>Software & Computer Engineering - A.I.
> - > http://www.rnl.ist.utl.pt/~pocm
> ---
> Yes, God had a deadline...
> So, He wrote it all in Lisp!
David C. Ullrich
Stephen Orzel
Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
If anyone can think of a clearer, more general definition,
please reply. I'm interested to see what people think about
this.
Steve
---------------------
Nat Silver
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
Mathematics is the study of how to reduce
questions to the solving of equations.
glenn
<po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
>I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
>maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
>Best regards,
Mathematics is a bunch of proofs.
Franz Fritsche
<po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
"Mathematics is the science of infinity"
(Hermann Weyl )
F.
Minti
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
According to Shakuntala Devi [ An Indian ]
Mathematics is only is sytematic effort for solving puzzles posed by nature.
Franz Fritsche
>
> According to Shakuntala Devi [ An Indian ]
> Mathematics is only is sytematic effort for solving puzzles posed by nature.
>
I would rather say:
Mathematics is only is sytematic effort for solving puzzles
posed by nature or mind...
;-)
F.
Soroban
> "Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty.
Good one! Thank you, David!
Stuart L. Anderson
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
Philip J. Davis and Reuben Hersh in The Mathematical Experience, 1981
(Mariner Books Paperback 1998) said
The definition of mathematics changes. Each generation and each
thoughtful mathematician within a generation formulates a definition
according to his lights. We shall examine a number of alternate
formulations before we write Finis to this volume.
I consider this an excellent book. The paperback edition is US$18.00 and
I would expect any good library to have a copy.
However, don't expect a definitive answer.
--Stu
___________________________________________________________________
Stu Anderson stua...@drizzle.com Renton, Washington, USA
William Elliot
> "Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
> > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty.
>
Biology is dirty Chemistry.
Chemistry is dirty Physics.
Physics is dirty Mathematics.
Mathematics is dirty philosophy.
Philosophy is dirty theology.
Theology is dirty.
----
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Rainer Rosenthal
Zdislav V. Kovarik <kov...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA> wrote
> Many times, when I reveal to people that I teach Mathematics,
> they roll their eyes and exclaim "Oh, Math was my worst subject
> in school!"
> Whereupon I reply: "Well, it's a dirty job, but someone's
> gotta do it."
>
LOL
A funny variation of the "Well, no, you'd love maths too ..."
kind of missionary words, I normally use.
Rainer Rosenthal
r.ros...@web.de
James Buddenhagen
> In article <20020531.200231...@mega.ist.utl.pt>,
> Paulo J. Matos <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> wrote:
> >Hi all,
>
> >Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> >I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> >maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> I have read that Bertrand Russell defined it as the
> study of all propositions of the form P implies Q.
[...]
Bertrand Russell also wrote:
"Mathematics may be defined as the subject where we
never know what we are talking about, nor whether
what we are saying is true."
--Jim Buddenhagen
Soroban
> On 1 Jun 2002, David Kastrup wrote:
> > "Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
> > > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
> >
> > Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> > Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> > Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> > Mathematics is dirty.
> >
> The full extend of the dirt wasn't properly derived nor divined.
>
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty philosophy.
> Philosophy is dirty theology.
> Theology is dirty.
>
Even better! Thank you, William!
Did someone once say that a mathematician is a device
that turns coffee into theorems? (or something like that)
Thank you, William!
Dirk Van de moortel
> > "Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
> > > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
> >
> > Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> > Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> > Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> > Mathematics is dirty.
> >
> The full extend of the dirt wasn't properly derived nor divined.
>
And for completeness at the top:
Politicology is dirty Sociology
Sociology is dirty Psychology
Psychology is dirty Biology
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty philosophy.
> Philosophy is dirty theology.
> Theology is dirty.
Dirk Vdm
Robert J. Kolker
James Buddenhagen wrote:
> Bertrand Russell also wrote:
>
> "Mathematics may be defined as the subject where we
> never know what we are talking about, nor whether
> what we are saying is true."
>
The same is true of theology so this is not a very good definition.
Bob Kolker
Joona I Palaste
> Did someone once say that a mathematician is a device
> that turns coffee into theorems? (or something like that)
I believe that was Paul Erdös.
--
/-- Joona Palaste (pal...@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to do."
- Anon
Charlie-Boo
> Here is one that should be as clear and general as possible:
>
> Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
>
> If anyone can think of a clearer, more general definition,
> please reply. I'm interested to see what people think about
> this.
Isn't "quantity" just a synonym for "number"? But math is about more
than numbers. It is about lines and infinity, too. Numbers are
variations on the natural numbers, but the natural numbers are
generalized to any recursively enumerable set, e.g. wffs or computer
programs.
I think that the 1st step in creating an elusive definition is to make
lists of what it includes and what it excludes (intuitively). Then
one can abstract from that into a definition.
First you have to agree on what it is - before you can define it!
Charlie Volkstorf
PS The following article gives a single, simple basis for most all of
computer science, including mathematical programs, database programs,
the theory of computation and incompleteness in logic. You will see
much of mathematics (especially primitives such as Peano's axioms)
formalized, explained and used there: www.arxiv.org/html/cs.lo/0003071
Franz Fritsche
Ullrich) wrote:
>
> I'm not the first person to suggest that the real definition
> is that mathematics is that which mathematicians do.
>
When the neophyte asks 'What is mathematics?' or 'What is
physics?' perhaps the best reply is: 'You can make up your own
mind as to that, _after_ you have become acquainted with what
mathematicians and physicists do'.
( B. Mates, Elementary Logic)
F.
Franz Fritsche
>>
>> Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
>>
>
> Isn't "quantity" just a synonym for "number"? But math is about more
> than numbers. It is about lines and infinity, too. [ ... ]
>
How about:
"Mathematics is the study of relationships among
abstract entities" (?)
Since its (normally) not directly concerned with "real" (physical)
entities and t h e i r study ... [ Or only in form of a _model_ - an
abstraction - of physical systems, structures, objects, relations,
etc. ]
F.
Chergarj
>
Yes. Perfect. The subject is settled.
G C
Doug Magnoli
means you sit down and invent some basic things and some basic truths about
them. Then you see where it goes. If the things you're messing with go
somewhere interesting (group theory, abstract algebras, etc.), it becomes
math; otherwise, it withers and dies ("Well, _that_ was a boring little
exercise. Let's see if we can invent something more interesting.").
So from my point of view, math means what kind of properties can you derive
about a system from its (extended) definition.
-Doug Magnoli
[Delete the two and the three for email.]
"Paulo J. Matos" wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Best regards,
Jesse F. Hughes
> >Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
> >
>
> Yes. Perfect. The subject is settled.
How is category theory the study of relationships among quantities?
Group theory? What are the quantities?
When the question was first raised, I thought of the same Russell
quote as Herman Rubin, as he wrote, "I have read that Bertrand Russell
defined it as the study of all propositions of the form P implies Q."
I read that quote just this year, but I can't figure out where. (I
think I started reading a Russell article including the quote, but
that I lost interest in the article before the end. I'm not a
dedicated student. And I have too many collections of Russell articles
to know which book, much less which essay.)
I'm not sure that this is the *right* definition of mathematics, but
it's not as obviously wrong to my eyes as the above.
--
"To assert otherwise is to say that mathematical operations and symbols
mean whatever we want them to mean, varying from context to
context [...] It in essence introduces post-modernism into mathematics."
--Paul Lutus on absolute notation and mathematical humanism
William Elliot
Contemplating the comprehensible collective collaborations of sci.math,
aka sigh.math, comes forth corrosive correlative corollary.
How the Vicious Viscous Vision bites it's tiny tail:
Omniscience is dirty Telepathy
Telepathy is dirty Espionage
Espionage is dirty Military Science
Military Science is dirty Politics
Politics is dirty Economics
Economics is dirty Sociology
Sociology is dirty Psychology
Psychology is dirty Biology
Biology is dirty Chemistry
Chemistry is dirty Physics
Physics is dirty Mathematics
Mathematics is dirty philosophy
Philosophy is dirty theology
Theology is dirty,
dirty kids making mad moody mud pies out of dust and water.
Chergarj
>
>> >Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
>> >
>>
>> Yes. Perfect. The subject is settled.
>
>How is category theory the study of relationships among quantities?
>Group theory? What are the quantities?
>
>When the question was first raised, I thought of the same Russell
.........
ollections of Russell articles
>to know which book, much less which essay.)
>
>I'm not sure that this is the *right* definition of mathematics, but
>it's not as obviously wrong to my eyes as the above.
>
Come up with something better! What is your definition of Mathematics?
I only QUOTED the "...relationship among quantities" statement/definition.
It's the best I have seen. If you cannot come up with a better definition,
maybe you could modify that one into something we could all accept.
Most people don't go around trying to find a definition of Mathematics, but a
few people study Math and are not too concerned about whether they have a
reliable definition for it.
G C
Jesse F. Hughes
> >cher...@cs.com (Chergarj) writes:
> >
> >> >Mathematics is the study of relationships among quantities.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes. Perfect. The subject is settled.
> >
> >How is category theory the study of relationships among quantities?
> >Group theory? What are the quantities?
> >
> >When the question was first raised, I thought of the same Russell
> >quote as Herman Rubin,.......
> .........
> ollections of Russell articles
> >to know which book, much less which essay.)
> >
> >I'm not sure that this is the *right* definition of mathematics, but
> >it's not as obviously wrong to my eyes as the above.
> >
>
> Come up with something better! What is your definition of Mathematics?
> I only QUOTED the "...relationship among quantities" statement/definition.
> It's the best I have seen. If you cannot come up with a better definition,
> maybe you could modify that one into something we could all accept.
As I said, I thought that Russell's definition is better. I don't kid
myself about my abilities to exactly capture the field of mathematics
in one sentence, so, for now, I'll take Russell's.
I simply wanted to point out that very much of mathematics has no
clear relationship to quantities, and so the proffered definition
seems too limiting.
(One may complain that Russell's definition, that math is the study of
propositions of the form A => B, seems too broad or somehow fails to
focus on what is mathematical about these propositions. As I said,
it's not clear to me that this is exactly right, but it looks like a
reasonable starting point.)
--
"[N]ow for once I might actually have an audience that realizes that
[my proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is correct], because you see,
they'll finally know what's in it for them--cold, hard cash."
--James Harris embarks on a new mathematical strategy.
Jesse F. Hughes
> As I said, I thought that Russell's definition is better. I don't kid
> myself about my abilities to exactly capture the field of mathematics
> in one sentence, so, for now, I'll take Russell's.
>
> I simply wanted to point out that very much of mathematics has no
> clear relationship to quantities, and so the proffered definition
> seems too limiting.
>
> (One may complain that Russell's definition, that math is the study of
> propositions of the form A => B, seems too broad or somehow fails to
> focus on what is mathematical about these propositions. As I said,
> it's not clear to me that this is exactly right, but it looks like a
> reasonable starting point.)
I took the time to glance through a book that I thought might contain
Russell's definition above ("Essays in Analysis"). I didn't find it,
but I found the following quote in the essay, "Is Mathematics Purely
Linguistic?"
We may say, as a definition: Mathematical and logical propositions
are such as (a) apart from variables, contain only syntactical
words, (b) can be seen to be true because of the meaning of the
syntactical words they contain, or (alternatively)) in virtue of
their form.
[...]
Our conclusion is that the propositions of logic and mathematics is
purely linguistic, and that they are concerned with syntax. When a
proposition 'p' seems to occur, what really occurs is '"p" is
true'. All /applications/ of mathematics depend upon the
principle:
'"p" is true' implies 'p'.
All the propositions of mathematics and logic are assertion as to
the correct use of a certain small number of words.
I confess I don't understand much of the second paragraph, aside from
the concluding sentence. I have not read the article, however, and
merely skimmed it for these relevant passages.
This is a definition of what sorts of sentences are mathematical
sentences. It's not quite clear whether settling that question also
settles the question of what mathematics is.
--
Jesse Hughes
"Wiles made somewhere around half a million dollars U.S. that I heard
about, and I know he didn't take major endorsements."
--JSH on the rewards of proving Fermat's last theorem.
Mike Kent
I think this is probably the most useful definitiln -- mathematics
is what mathematicians do, i.e., the activity of turning coffee
into theorems (broadly construed).
Jesse F. Hughes
> I think this is probably the most useful definitiln -- mathematics
> is what mathematicians do, i.e., the activity of turning coffee
> into theorems (broadly construed).
Not so different from the definition of science that a philosopher of
science proposed to me: Science is what scientists do.
I'm not particularly happy with either definition, nonetheless.
Clearly, they push the question back a bit, but not too far. There
are a couple of folks on this group that might allege they're
mathematicians, despite the fact that this is a minority opinion. So,
then what? Surely, mathematics is not (merely) what peer-reviewed
published mathematicians do.
--
Jesse Hughes
Besides, I think Slackware sounds better than 'Microsoft,' don't you?
-- Patrick Volkerding
Dave L. Renfro
[sci.math 01 Jun 2002 00:48:20 +0200]
http://mathforum.org/epigone/sci.math/calkolpre/x5it54c...@tupik.goethe.zz
wrote
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty.
Going the full circle . . .
Psychology is dirty Biology
Biology is dirty Chemistry
Chemistry is dirty Physics
Physics is dirty Mathematics
Mathematics is dirty Logic
Logic is dirty Philosophy
Philosophy is dirty Psychology
Speaking of circles, James Hunter would say (Hey,
it's been a while since I last did one of these.),
Only a kiss-ass mathematician would wanker
himself with the ILLUSION that studying the
*Pi* of a circular PROOF will end his deadbeat
bean counter status.
Dave L. Renfro
Bill Taylor
|> This of course is just the old argument about whether math is discovered
|> or invented;
Platonists discover, formalists play, intuitionists invent, solipsists fantasize.
|> whether there really is a set of natural numbers, or if we made it up.
See my sig...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And God said
Let there be numbers
And there *were* numbers.
Odd and even created he them,
He said to them be fruitful and multiply
And he commanded them to keep the laws of induction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor
|> they roll their eyes and exclaim "Oh, Math was my worst subject in school!"
|> Whereupon I reply: "Well, it's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it."
Not bad, but I think even better is: pat their arm consolingly and say
in most condescending tones:
"Never mind, I was never much good at READING, either!"
That oughta shut them up!
Oh, and for my own, and therefore favourite, definition...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATH: the discovery, clarification and rigorous study of
precise relationships in number, pattern, and structure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor
|> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
|> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
|> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
|> Mathematics is dirty.
Thats cool! Very droll.
It reminds me of another old one:-
There are two sorts of science: physics and stamp collecting.
------------------------------------------------------------
I guess we could marry these two concepts and produce the following...
There are two sorts of studies: mathematicss and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of science: physics and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of chemistry: physical and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of organic chemistry: analytic and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of biology: molecular and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of human biology: medical and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of medicine: pharmaceutical and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of psychology: laboratory and stamp collecting.
There are two sorts of psychiatry: stamp collecting and foreign stamp collecting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In science - one tries to tell people, so as to be understood by everyone,
something no one ever knew before. In humanities, it's the exact opposite.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor
|> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
|> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
|> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
|> Mathematics is dirty philosophy.
|> Philosophy is dirty theology.
|> Theology is dirty.
You got the last two the wrong way round:-
Philosophy is cleaned-up theology; logic is cleaned-up philosophy; pure math
is cleaned up logic. (We can make aplied math cleaned-up physics.)
However, nor does the original list go far enough:
Applied math is dirty pure math.
Physics is dirty applied math.
Chemistry is dirty physics.
Organic chemistry is dirty chemistry.
Biology is dirty organic chemistry.
Medicine is dirty biology.
Psychology is dirty medicine.
Sociology is dirty psychology.
Politics is dirty sociology.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law: invented by politicians as a form of "jobs for the boys".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Hunter
William Elliot wrote:
> On 1 Jun 2002, David Kastrup wrote:
> > "Paulo J. Matos" <po...@mega.ist.utl.pt> writes:
> > > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
> >
> > Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> > Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> > Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> > Mathematics is dirty.
> >
> The full extend of the dirt wasn't properly derived nor divined.
>
> Biology is dirty Chemistry.
> Chemistry is dirty Physics.
> Physics is dirty Mathematics.
> Mathematics is dirty philosophy.
> Philosophy is dirty theology.
> Theology is dirty.
Theology does not exist, so it is not dirty anything,
since it is merely another form of meta-politics
invented by mathemamorons, and their
associated set of the N-stooges of academia.
Who's only real use is poor grades, whing
like any every religious suck ass dork does,
and moaning on their trail of tears:
Gravity's got me down, and I can't get up!
Chergarj
them.
G C
Wayne Brown
> Not so different from the definition of science that a philosopher of
> science proposed to me: Science is what scientists do.
> I'm not particularly happy with either definition, nonetheless.
> Clearly, they push the question back a bit, but not too far. There
> are a couple of folks on this group that might allege they're
> mathematicians, despite the fact that this is a minority opinion. So,
> then what? Surely, mathematics is not (merely) what peer-reviewed
> published mathematicians do.
How about this: Mathematics is the inverse (or perhaps the negation)
of whatever it is that James Harris does.
--
Wayne Brown | "When your tail's in a crack, you improvise
fwb...@bellsouth.net | if you're good enough. Otherwise you give
| your pelt to the trapper."
"e^(i*pi) = -1" -- Euler | -- John Myers Myers, "Silverlock"
Virgil
mat...@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor) wrote:
> |> This of course is just the old argument about whether math is discovered
> |> or invented;
>
>
> Platonists discover, formalists play, intuitionists invent, solipsists
> fantasize.
Aha, that pegs JSH as a solipsist!
Bill Taylor
|> Platonists discover, formalists play, intuitionists invent, solipsists fantasize
>
> Aha, that pegs JSH as a solipsist!
Sounds about right! What a pity for the rest of us that we *do* exist.
Oops, scratch that; what a pity for the rest of us that *he* exists!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Taylor W.Ta...@math.canterbury.ac.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The trouble with solipsism is that it makes ME responsible for YOUR idiocies!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerry Myerson
<pal...@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:
=> Soroban <afetr...@aol.com> scribbled the following:
=> > Did someone once say that a mathematician is a device
=> > that turns coffee into theorems? (or something like that)
=>
=> I believe that was Paul Erdös.
Many believe that.
They are wrong.
Erdos popularized the saying, but was careful to attribute it
to Renyi.
--
Gerry Myerson (ge...@mpce.mq.edi.ai) (i -> u for email)
Mikito Harakiri
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
Mathematics is a great way of thinking about useless things.
(I stole this one from some other newsgroup).
Mikael Johansson
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
The one I like the most is the definition of mathematics as the theory of
'if - then'-statements.
It emphasizes one of the more profound changes of perspective involved
with mathematical thinking -- that every statement made is made in a
certain context, with certain assumptions; and that one has the freedom to
change these assumptions at will (and thus changing the object of study).
A friend of mine tried to explain the essence of mathematics to a girl we
dined with the other day, and seeing that she had quite some trouble
grasping my ramblings on the subject, clarified it by stating that -- to
us -- the world is divided in two areas: The practicalities, and
everything else; where mathematics is everything else combined with a way
of thinking about it.
> Best regards,
>
// Mikael Johansson
--
+-----------------------------------------+
| Mikael Johansson mik...@johanssons.org |
+-----------------------------------------+
| **** NEWSFLASH **** |
| mikael.j...@wineasy.se is obsolete |
| Please use mik...@johanssons.org |
| **** NEWSFLASH **** |
+-----------------------------------------+
Mikael Johansson
> Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> > Does anyone know an interesting definition of Mathematics?
> > I could search it in an encyclopedia but I want a interesting definition,
> > maybe a quote or something. Any ideas?
>
> Mathematics is the study of how to reduce
> questions to the solving of equations.
>
Is it?