Why is math proof so important in scientific research?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shamrock5585
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the importance of mathematical proof in scientific research, exploring the nature of mathematical truth, the acceptance of theorems, and the foundational axioms of mathematics. Participants examine the implications of proofs, the role of axioms, and the relationship between mathematics and human understanding.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that mathematical proof serves as a universal language that, once validated, requires no further citation of sources.
  • Others argue that the acceptance of a theorem relies on the correctness of its proof and the verification by peers, emphasizing the importance of foundational axioms.
  • A participant questions the nature of mathematical symbols, suggesting that while they may represent a language, they do not constitute mathematics itself.
  • There is a discussion about the self-evident nature of axioms, with some participants suggesting that these axioms are accepted without proof, leading to philosophical inquiries about the nature of logic and rationality.
  • One participant discusses the implications of definitions in mathematics, illustrating how assumptions can lead to proofs and the potential for contradictions in definitions.
  • Concerns are raised about historical crises in mathematics that arose from foundational definitions, such as Zeno's Paradox and Russell's Paradox, which prompted significant reformulations in mathematical understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the nature of mathematical proof, its acceptance, and the role of axioms. There is no consensus on the philosophical implications of these concepts, and multiple competing views remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions and the unresolved nature of philosophical questions regarding the foundations of mathematics and logic. The discussion also touches on historical mathematical crises that challenge the stability of certain definitions.

  • #61
HallsofIvy said:
You are apprently not understanding anything being said here. Have you actually read and thought about it all? We have said repeatedly that axioms are not "self evident" yet you continue to use that phrase. The whole point of mathematics is to say "if this is true, then what are the consequences?"

And note that axioms define the very essence of the scientific method: we always move forward with the proviso that we may be wrong about anything and everything. (Though that does not slow our forward progress.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
963
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
98
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K