- #1
Sreenath Skr
- 11
- 0
"Do we need math to understand nature or Do we need to understand nature to (create) math?"
This was the topic I've been debating with a guy for a long time.
The whole point he says is that "we cannot UNDERSTAND nature without mathematics"
How could that be? Isn't that in other way?
How can we create maths without understanding nature?
Didn't we know objects fall to Earth without the laws of gravity?
Didn't we know that every action has equal and opposite reaction without Newtons 3rd law of motion?
These laws are already there in nature, and we just used math to write it down.
For example 1+1=2 is the way nature shows us. We used numbers to express it. The laws of addition and subtraction etc aren't made by math itself, it's shown by nature.
Or am i wrong? Don't we understand nature without maths?
This was the topic I've been debating with a guy for a long time.
The whole point he says is that "we cannot UNDERSTAND nature without mathematics"
How could that be? Isn't that in other way?
How can we create maths without understanding nature?
Didn't we know objects fall to Earth without the laws of gravity?
Didn't we know that every action has equal and opposite reaction without Newtons 3rd law of motion?
These laws are already there in nature, and we just used math to write it down.
For example 1+1=2 is the way nature shows us. We used numbers to express it. The laws of addition and subtraction etc aren't made by math itself, it's shown by nature.
Or am i wrong? Don't we understand nature without maths?
Last edited: