Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alusair
You'd have to tell that to the scientists and philosophers that decided this, I'm only repeating their message.
Philosophers made these claims back in the day when virtually nothing was known about the 'language' of math. As for scientists they use normal math which makes sense to most, given that the numbering system is them same. I'm not bashing what you are saying, just explaining my weird point of view.
Quote:
But I think the problem here is you're looking at the language conveying math, not math itself. Different cultures may have different words or different symbols for "one" (case in point: compare Chinese and English), but one, in whatever language or interpretation it's conveyed, is always one.
This is exactly what I was getting at. Math itself is a language and it is generic, that I agree with completely, what I dont agree with is that it is universal. Why? Because like I previously said all of math is based on our ten digits. If instead math was based on 'natural' numbers, such as pi and e this would be a different conversation altogether, as we would be using the same 'letters' so to speak in our conversations. But odds are that any other race would have its own distinct numbering system, and as a result all of their mathematical expressions will be built to describe different things then what ours describe.
Quote:
Example: We have one sun. It is a singular object, and not a multiple. Perhaps in Opposite Land (located on Earth), their word for "one" is actually "two". So they will say, "We have two sun." but that doesn't mean we all suddenly have multiple suns in our sky. We have a singular star. We call it one. Opposite Land has a singular star. They call it two. Ultimately, however, it is the same thing, no matter how it's described: a singular star.
Sure its a single star, but how is this represented? We call it one, they call it two all of a sudden we think that there are two stars rather then one.
Quote:
Geometric shapes would be the same. A three-cornered shape whose angles always add up to 180 degrees is a triangle. Unless you go into a universe with different dimensions (which I'd rather rule out), a three-cornered shape whose angles always add up to 180 degrees is always going to be a triangle, whether it's called a triangle by humans, a cat by Martians, or a "gggargglglabl" by the Gobbledygooks.
Again this holds true in 2 and 3 dimensions, and again it holds given that we are using the same numbering system. Admittedly, we did get smart and devise pi to be the basis of the geometric system, but what if pi itself isn't a natural number in another galaxy, then we are back to the same dilemma.
Once you get into discussing outcomes of anything in n dimensions, which you will almost be forced to if you are communicating with intelligent extra terrestrial beings, it will become nothing but a big pile of mumbo jumbo. How can you explain something in a mathematical so flawed system that it allows outcomes to be 'imaginary'
Quote:
If you could tell an alien race to draw a (2D) shape of the Earth (assuming they're capable of doing this), they'd draw a circle. No matter what the aliens call this circle, a circle is what it is, and that's what's supposed to make math a universal language.
Agreed, thats the beauty of using something like pi :D
Quote:
Physical senses aren't universal, though. We have no guarantee that all possible life out there has vision, hearing, feeling, taste, or smell. We've found plenty of things on our own world that lack some of these things (for instance, moles don't have eyes). There's also no guarantee we possess all senses. We can't see infra-red, ultraviolet, x-ray, or heat with our naked eye, yet there they are.
True we cant see them but we can detect them. I made that statement assuming that we want to come into contact with a civilization at least as advanced as us. What better way to do this then to start sending out weird bursts of specified unnatural sound waves, or even light waves which would be faster. If they detect them then maybe they wonder what is this and the wheels start turning?
Following that train of thought, what if Einstein was right and light is the fastest natural particle? And this whole neutrino thing, which started with really weird particles being observed seemingly coming from the sun were in fact coming from behind it sent from another planet in an attempt to alert us of them being there? Thats a bit of a mind :modedit: ...
Quote:
To put the shoe on the other foot, what happens if aliens decide that telepathy, or "palevosence" (some hypothetical sensation I just made up for sake of example which we have no equivalent for) is the universal communication that determines whether life is intelligent or not? Well, we'd be left out.
If there are beings like this out there it may almost be better to not come into contact with them :D
Quote:
This is a problem with math being universal, however. Despite however you want to describe singularity or a shape, they, as a concept, exist everywhere in the universe. The problem is being able to communicate this to others. How would you tell a plant what we call a circle? Granted, a plant isn't considered sentient, but this is a possible situation we'd have trying to communicate with alien life.
Agreed
Quote:
In this way, sure, perhaps math isn't as great a language as it's proclaimed to be, because it would suggest a method of communication and there is no guarantee it would work that way (refer to example of the plant). But it is universal in the way that oranges may exist only on Earth, but spheres exist everywhere in our galaxy (such as in the form of most stars and planets and other large enough spacial bodies to develop a regular shape), and it's assumed that intelligent life will have developed some sort of recognition for numbers or shapes, however alien this recognition would be to someone from Earth. Then again perhaps it's arrogant and erroneous for us to assume intelligent life would recognize these things as we do.
See here you have to make a distinction between math and shapes. Sure we have functions which describe every shape imaginable, and if all these functions were based with natural numbers I would agree with you that a sphere is a sphere everywhere, but the way that a sphere is described is greatly different and this the major problem. I dont know if you can see what I am saying, because like I have acknowledged many times explaining stuff in text is not a strength of mine.
I like how you threw that arrogant bit in there ... It's likely that if there is another civilization out there our assumptions on what they recognize will keep us from them and their assumptions on what we know will keep them from us.
