One of the most powerful tools of investigative science is maths. Theories are often debunked simply because its associated mathematics failed in some practical way.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Yet math is full of mysteries:

We cannot state the ratio of a circle. Pi is a name given to a "transcendant irrational" that is really the unresolved question of, what is the ratio of a circles radius to its circumference? I am not questioning the practical value of what we do know, I have used it often when programming ratio relationships and cams on servo control systems. But I have to program in compensation for the accummulated "error" of using Pi. No matter what resolution of Pi, there will ultimately be an error to compensate for. This shows up in cyclic systems probably better than anywhere else.

Math predicts the infinite divisibility of a fixed length. But we know from quanta that this is not true, that there is a limit to smallness. Or at least that seems to be the conclusions from present physics.

Math predicts infinity, yet the concept of an infinite universe is doubted.

Math predicts more dimensions than the four we can whitness around us, and yet, as far as I am aware, no empirical eveidence of further dimensions exists.

My question is simply this, should we place our faith in the predictions of math, or not?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Math maps, or not?

Loading...

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**