Maths is mind bending. It takes 700 pages to prove 1 + 1 = 2. Ultimately maths can’t be proven to be complete, consistent or decidable. (from Veritasium) So is there a discrete point at which it deviates from reality? We’ve all experienced being in the red. My bank statement might read £256. In maths we would assign it a value of -£256, a minus number. I might deposit £300 and happily find myself back in the black. I can’t have minus 3 apples but I can have 3 apples. My feelings in both cases will switch from negative anxiety to positive happiness, but we all know feelings have no place in mathematics. But here they clearly indicate the vectors of positive and negative. So is a minus sign part of a number or a vector associated with it? If it is an associated vector we then only have positive numbers as clean, devoid of any association. ‘-256 =256 x -1’ where -1 is the vector. So are we truly recognising it as such? (I’ve no idea where I’m going with this) In the bank example it’s easy to see the vector change from me owing the bank to the bank owing me, but the apples? I can owe 3 apples having borrowed 3 earlier but however I might want any number of apples for whatever reason I can’t ‘have minus 3 apples’ in the greater scheme of things. The universe doesn’t owe me anything. Does this suggests minus is a human invention only applicable in the human mind? Have we invented it to indicate our difference in feelings from negative anxiety to positive happiness? If minus, the most basic of operators, only exists in the human mind and not in our wider environment can it be deceiving us in our mathematical modelling of it? Can it be a discrete point at which maths deviates from reality?
No comments:
Post a Comment