# Reality is mathematics / Mathematics is reality ?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Write4U, Nov 27, 2018.

1. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
12,911
OK, so you are admitting mea culpa on this - and the page or so of discussion about it:

3. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
12,911
This is an oversimplification in the context of a non-technical explanation.
It is technically inaccurate.

You have been around here long enough to know that attempts to invoke such simplistic explanations in a science forum will be challenged.

5. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Well yes, we are always guessing. That's the point Anil Seth makes.

But I usually can find a clue and in this case ; if you look closely at the small red portions which are closest (next) to each other in the illustration, the apparent big difference in color is reduced and they look much closer to each other, than when you view each picture in it's entirety, because of the predominant secondary colors in each illustration.

7. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Talk to the people in the link I provided. They published that definition and I presume they stand behind that.
I merely quoted it because it sounded sufficiently accurate for conversational purpose.

8. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
12,911
You don't have to guess though.

9. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
12,911
You referenced it; you are on the hook for it. Your choice of references reflects your knowledge of the science.

I take then that, because you know better, you're not trying to defend that description for your own argument. You realize that was a poor choice to reference in a discussion about the distinction between colour and wavelength.

Last edited: May 22, 2019
10. ### river

Messages:
12,737
Thanks

Do you think the Universe does the same ?

Messages:
8,056
12. ### river

Messages:
12,737

Reality is not mathematics . Because reality is physical first . Without the physical there is no us let alone mathematics .

Reality is first the study of physical things . In all its physical energy states .

Vibration , magnetic fields , rotation , electrics etc .

Last edited: May 23, 2019
13. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Yes, and those are all mathematical patterns called "fields".
But you need to look deeper from an abstract perspective of what constitutes a physical object to begin with.

The Table of elements is a perfect example. All atoms are made of three same components. What creates a specific atom is the mathematical distribution patterns of those three components which gives each atom a unique mathematical value signature and potential to perform work.

All patterns, from the very subtle to gross expression in reality are of a mathematical nature. It is the single common denominator of all things in the universe. There are only values and functions, i.e. Mathematical Dynamics and its self-referential twin, Dynamical Mathematics (Causal Dynamical Triangulation).

14. ### river

Messages:
12,737

Disagree

You put the mathematics before the physical , why do you this ?

Without the physical objects there is no mathematics .

15. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Because you cannot start with something physical before there is something physical. That is circular logic based on a false premise.
Mathematics do not need a physical existence. They are a transcendent "guiding principle" in all patterns. Mathematics are forming imperatives from abstract interactions of "values" and "functions". David Bohm identified this mathematical engine as the Implicate order.
https://www.scienceandnonduality.com/article/david-bohm-implicate-order-and-holomovement

Bohmian Mechanics is a controversial, but viable hypothesis of the nature of the Universe.
His book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order" is studied by all theoretical physicists and cosmologists. Link to PDF below.
http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/DavidBohm-WholenessAndTheImplicateOrder.pdf

And IMO, BM is the foundation for Renate Loll's hypothesis of Causal Dynamical Triangulation (CDT)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation

and a PDF
http://london.ucdavis.edu/~reu/REU07/zhang.pdf

Last edited: May 24, 2019
16. ### river

Messages:
12,737

You realise that this last statement makes absolutely no sense . Wright4U .

17. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Read the rest, where I explain my perspective.

18. ### river

Messages:
12,737
What posts # (s) ?

19. ### Michael 345New year. PRESENT is 69 years oldValued Senior Member

Messages:
8,056
Disagree

Without something to MATHEMATIC you have squat

Think this is a version of chicken / egg

We know the egg came first

This version physical stuff first

river likes this.
20. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Do you believe the concept of "one" needs an actual physical object named or is it a abstract value, applicable in a host of different mathematical constructs?
Yes, but that only means that a chicken could never precede an egg.
This is a mathematical function. The mathematics of the chicken/egg phenomenon existed before it was expressed chronologically in reality.

Peter Higgs used purely theoretical mathematics applied in the Cern Collider to force the non-physical potential of an enfolded Higgs boson to become unfolded in reality.

Bohm called it the (mathematical) "enfolded implicate" of that which is to physically "become unfolded in reality", from the very subtle to gross expression in reality.

21. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Post # 492 . It contains supporting formal hypotheses to my perspective, including PDFs.

Note: I didn't even mention Tegmark.....

22. ### Write4UValued Senior Member

Messages:
11,815
Just an afterthought; mathematics gives meaning to all physical behaviors.

23. ### river

Messages:
12,737
Yes

To us .

Last edited: May 24, 2019