I replied to you saying that you believe that the "absolute laws" of the universe "can be expressed exactly with mathematics".As are all metaphysical issues. But we're talking about science...

If what you meant is that whenever human beings try to write down the "absolute" laws of the universe, they will probably use mathematics, then I have no argument with you.

I don't know. It seems to me, however, that there are many things that we experience in our daily lives that do not lend themselves to mathematical descriptions, and that's before we start thinking about any "ultimate laws" and such.Is there anything that can be repeated that can not ultimately be expressed in mathematical terms?

It might seem like a reasonable assumption that all complex things can be reduced to simple things by reducing them to the operation of a few fundamental mathematical rules. Maybe that is actually true, but I don't see any way to prove it.

I understand. I'm just not as confident as you are that mathematics is capable of describing everything.Again, just to be clear, at no point am I saying that maths is real. I think we agree that it is descriptive of what is going on.

If science's description of the universe can be reduced ultimately to a description provided by a set of a mathematical rules, then nothing could ever be outside of science, could it?I am referring to science, to physics (i.e. physical laws) and not to things that might be outside of science.

Perfect dice is an abstract idea. There are no real-world perfect dice. So, yes, we can accurately describe what happens in an idealised situation or thought experiment. That's the sort of thing science does all the time, and it is incredibly useful. But, as I said, the fact that this sort of abstract is useful does not necessarily mean it is actually getting to the heart of the nature of the universe.Probability is mathematical, though. We can accurately describe the result probability of a perfect dice, can we not?

When we roll a real-world six-sided die, if it has been manufactured reasonably well, then the chances of roll a six will be very close to one in six, but the reality is that it will probably never be exactly one in six when we use a real-world die because no real-world die is perfect.

It means exactly that. A perfect mathematical description of a dice roll would be able to predict what result would come up, every time.And the inability to predict single occurrences does not mean that the whole is not still perfectly described by the mathematics.