There are no naturally-occurring Martian rovers.The artificial copying of naturally occurring processes in the course of applied mathematicshas allowed us to start reaching for the stars. All the mathematical descriptions and predictions were met and we landed a Rover on Mars.

No, it doesn't. Maximum web integrity would involve a very dense, solid web. Spiders don't build those. They build tenuous, easily-damaged structures.And a spider weaves a mathematical pattern for maximum web integrity.

Yes. You're only wrong about what is "efficient" for a spider's web.It doesn't know that but evolution has given her with the fundamental blueprint of fashioning a web in an efficient and orderly manner.

Where did those different patterns exist before humans used them?The different patterns necessary for landing a physical object the size of a rocket existed before humans used them, codified them, and symbolized them with human maths.

No. Evolution doesn't do that. Lots of things are very inefficient in evolution.Other living organisms don't need to codify mathematical patterns, to possess fundamental mathematics. Evolutionary processes will select the mathematically most efficient patterns for survival.

Are you willing to learn anything new about evolution, or are you going to tell me I'm wrong? Or will you just ignore this and keep right on believing what you believe?

Word salad.The fact we can use mathematical measurements to copy nature and artificially use the mathematical potentials of the universe in a lab.. What we lack is size, a mathematical property, but we make up with the ability to compute and record naturally emergent properties in a small sampling.

"More and less" is not a differential equation. Come on, Write4U. You've looked up "differential equation" on wikipedia before. You have even cut-and-pasted definitions across to this forum. Didn't you read those definitions in the process of doing that? Did you not understand them?A Lemur can tell the difference between "more" and "less", a differential equation, and can use that mathematical skill to make an informed decision and be rewarded with a treat (positive reinforcement).

What about the conversations we had with you previously, after you misused the term "differential equation"? Did you learn anything from those conversations? Or have you forgotten them? Or did you simply ignore them, to go on believing what you believe, regardless?

If "aerodynamics" is the formal study of flight, then birds and insects don't use it.Air dwellers (birds, insects) are masters at using aerodynamics from evolved efficiencies in staying aloft and alive in the sky and therefore have an advantage over earth-bound animals.

Yes. That suggests that they have some sort of intuitive mathematical sense or heuristic "built in" by evolution, which is similar to something you said earlier about bees. However, they aren't getting out pencil and paper and solving equations. They aren't "doing maths". Also, experience counts for lot here. Lots of animals learn from experience.Many predators use triangulation to hunt or strike prey that has formidable defenses.

It is not.Isn't the evolutionary process of increasing adaptation to the environment itself a mathematical function?

Do you recall previous discussions on what a mathematical function is? Or did you ignore those, to go on believing what you believe?

It's one thing to make a mistake once and then learn how to do better next time. It's another to keep making the same mistake over and over, never accepting correction. It's pathological or, at best, hopelessly stubborn.

If only you were able to convinceI see mathematics as a codified form of Logic that must be a universal "common denominator".

*anybody*else of your views. But that would require having a reason, for starters.

---

That's all there was in terms of actual Write4U contributions to posts #526 through #537. Signal to noise ratio remarkably low, albeit consistent with your usual output here.