So.. real numbers are not real?

And the imaginary plane should actually contain everything?

Maths is just a model which attempts to explain the real world

You seem to be confusing maths and physics.

Physics is just applied maths.

Maths is just a model which attempts to explain the real world
You seem to be confusing maths and physics.

I’m not, but now I’m wondering why you think I am

So.. real numbers are not real?

Well, they are just a representation, they are not a ‘thing’ in themselves

I’m not, but now I’m wondering why you think I am

Why do you think I’d think that? It’s a pretty simple bit of text to parse, physics is an attempt to model the real world, maths isn’t.

Why do you think I’d think that?

erm, because you said it seemed i was confusing the tow

physics is an attempt to model the real world, maths isn’t

oh yes it is

Oh no it isn’t. etc.

well, one and two don’t exist in themselves, we use them to represent quantities which we see in the real (or theoretical) world. Mathematical ‘truths’ are not really true, as they don’t always apply

You are contradicting yourself. 1+1=2 as a mathematical statement is axiomatically true (depending on your axioms). You are quite right that the numbers don’t exist in themselves, but they are explicitly not an attempt to model anything real.

You are contradicting yourself.

where?

1+1=2 as a mathematical statement is axiomatically true
well, if you call it an axiom of course it has to be ‘true’ however it fails to represent what happens in the real world where adding one thing to another of the same does not always give you two of those things

but they are explicitly not an attempt to model anything real

Ok… what are we using them for then?

maths qualifications are just for getting into uni, got some pretty good ones and I don’t think they’ve ever helped me get a job.

well, if you call it an axiom of course it has to be ‘true’ however it fails to represent what happens in the real world where adding one thing to another of the same does not always give you two of those things

Exactly, because it has nothing to do with the real world. It’s a formal system.

Ok… what are we using them for then?

See previous comment regarding physics.

Exactly, because it has nothing to do with the real world. It’s a formal system

Can we not use 1+1=2 in any way to help us in the real world?

Ok, so you think counting is physics?

Ok, so you think counting is physics?

No it’s an example. Of course you can use mathematics for a multitide of different things, that doesn’t make mathematics a model of the real world though.

Of course you can use mathematics for a multitide of different things, that doesn’t make mathematics a model of the real world
though

I don’t think that is what I said

So, it does have something to do with the real world?

I am only messing with you CM, I know you know your maths, and I agree with you anyway. I love the ambiguity of what numbers actually are. If there are three rocks in space, that is a definite physical property as distinct from another group of four rocks – but the concept of three has been invented by humans – hasn’t it?

You are quite right that the numbers don’t exist in themselves, but they are explicitly not an attempt to model anything real

They were conceived as an attempt to model something real (quantities of real objects) and I would suggest they still are a model of something real.

Maths is just a model which attempts to explain the real world

You’ll have to translate this sentence then.

and I would suggest they still are a model of something real.

What are they a model of? Even if you consider the real numbers to be models of “real” things, maths is obviously far more than merely real numbers.

You’ll have to translate this sentence then.

That is very different from saying it is a model of the real world. You might need to read it again.

What is being modelled? Well, for example then mean of a group of numbers attempts to represent / model those numbers.

Why don’t you state what your position is? You maths has nothing to do with the real world. Numbers are an example or an existence proof of maths having an role in modelling the real world.

Which part of that do you disagree with? What is it you think?

You seem to be confusing maths and physics.

This.

Maths is just a model which attempts to explain the real world

This is the bit I disagree with. As a statement, it is simply incorrect. However, if you replace the word maths with physics, it would be a perfectly good statement.

As a very simple example, you can define all sorts of different geometries, all of which are mutually inconsistent with each other hence at most only one of them representing the real world. They would all be mathematically valid however.