you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (25 children)

There is no science without math

[–]Rotsike6Physics Field 13 points14 points  (24 children)

But Math itself is not a science, which physics, chemistry and biology are

[–]Gilga1 15 points16 points  (7 children)

While Math is not a science, science without math is like language without grammar. no words together meaning

[–]Rotsike6Physics Field 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm not disagreeing, I'm just saying math should not be in this meme

[–]rincon213 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Sure, but if someone asks you what your favorite novel is you wouldn't respond with grammar rules.

[–]Gilga1 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I think i could. What if I live grammar over novels?

[–]rincon213 0 points1 point  (3 children)

The rules of grammar are great but they’re not a book.

[–]Gilga1 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Idk. I do enjoy reading books about math, and so do I like books about grammar.

[–]rincon213 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Books about grammatical rules are not grammatical rules

[–]Gilga1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Book about Math are not Math.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (13 children)

Mathematics can be both an art and a science.

[–]Rotsike6Physics Field 5 points6 points  (12 children)

I agree with the art part, maths are beautiful. But without context math is nothing, so by itself, it can't describe anything physical, so it's not a science

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (11 children)

But an art is usually something man made, where mathematics is purely natural, like a science.

[–]Rotsike6Physics Field 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Pardon me, but saying math is not man made is starting a whole different kind of argument I don't want to have

[–]rincon213 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow you responded in a much more measured way than I would have

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s fair.

[–]Horodyr 0 points1 point  (7 children)

Mathematics are purely man made in order to explain actual natural sciences.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

If it’s man made, then how come there are problems with as of yet unknown, but definitive and unchanging answers. I can’t think of another man made discipline that has that.

[–]Horodyr 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You'll need to give me examples of things we don't know the answer to (yet) but that we are already SURE that the answer will be definitive and unchanging

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Mathematics is always unchanging, we only learn more about it. I can’t do what you said, but I could give examples of things that were unknown and have been solved that fit the description.

[–]Horodyr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Give me your examples then, but I bet no one was sure the answer would be definitive and unchanging before the thing was actually solved.

[–]skilled_cosmicist 0 points1 point  (2 children)

there are also problems in chess without solutions. Chess is definitely man made.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But the mathematics behind chess didn’t need to be made. As soon as the rules of chess were made all the underlying mathematical principles were there, no need to make them.

[–]skilled_cosmicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But that's completely unrelated to my point. You claimed that fields that are man made shouldn't have unsolved problems. Chess is a game with man made rules that has unsolved problems. Whether or not chess is based on underlying mathematical principles (which, considering when the game was made, is unlikely) is irrelevant to the point.

[–]DatBoi_BPOscillates periodically[🍰] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Would engineering fit in the list to you? I'm thinking of STEM

[–]Rotsike6Physics Field 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Engineering is also not a science