Mathematics and unprovable assumptions

Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the relationship between mathematics and unprovable assumptions, drawing parallels with religion. One participant argues that many fundamental tenets of mathematics are unprovable, similar to religious beliefs, while others counter that mathematics operates on a system of axioms that are not claimed to be absolutely true. The conversation explores the nature of mathematical axioms, with some asserting that mathematics is merely a language used to describe quantities and relationships, devoid of inherent truth. The role of mathematics in scientific theories is debated, with claims that mathematics cannot independently establish truths about the physical world without empirical observation. Gödel's incompleteness theorem is referenced, emphasizing the limitations of axiomatic systems, including mathematics itself. Participants express differing views on the implications of these ideas, with some defending the integrity of mathematics as a formal system, while others criticize its reliance on unprovable foundations. The discussion highlights the philosophical complexities surrounding the nature of truth in mathematics and its distinction from empirical sciences.
  • #61
The whole point of mathematics is that it is applicable to a variety of fields. Newton created calculus in order to solve problems in physics (specifically, the motion of planets). Yet people who are planning to use mathematics to solve problems in biology, psychology, or economics learn the same calculus.

That works precisely because axiomatic systems have "undefined words". In order to apply theorems from calculus (or linear algebra, or differential equations, or tensor theory) I have only to decide what meanings I will give to those undefined terms and then show that the axioms apply (at least approximately- in any real application, we have measurements that are only approximate) and then know that the theorems will be true for this application (again, at least approximately).

That's why mathematics is not "like religion". The one thing that all "Christian Religions" have in common (Jeff Lawson's referentce to "The Christian church" is naive at best- there are may different "Christian churchs" with widely varying beliefs) is that "Jesus Christ was an aspect of God that became human". Certainly no good Christian that I know would take the point of view that that is "true in some systems but not in others" which is exactly what mathematicians do.

No mathematician believes, for example, that "through any point not on a given line there exist a line through that point parallel to that given line" (Playfair's axiom). Mathematician accept that as an axiom for a certain axiomatic system (Euclidean geometry) which has proved to be a good model for many applications but not for some others. We can accept it as true (not assert that it is true in any universal sense) for some applications and as not true for others. I don't know of any religion that does that!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
357
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 333 ·
12
Replies
333
Views
18K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 112 ·
4
Replies
112
Views
10K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
346
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K