Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 2 minutes ago, m_m said: Everything changes; words, languages, art, science have also experienced cardinal changes. Do you have an example of mathematical statement that was proved to be true and later became false?
m_m Posted February 13 Author Posted February 13 Just now, Genady said: Do you have an example of mathematical statement that was proved to be true and later became false? Not false, but they change. For example "The metamathematics of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory has been extensively studied. Landmark results in this area established the logical independence of the axiom of choice from the remaining Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms and of the continuum hypothesis from ZFC. The consistency of a theory such as ZFC cannot be proved within the theory itself, as shown by Gödel's second incompleteness theorem. " https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermelo–Fraenkel_set_theory And senses change over time. I believe you call 3.14 pi, or maybe the Golden Ratio. I am sure you know it is also called divine proportion and God's Ratio. -3
Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 (edited) 1 hour ago, m_m said: Not false, but they change. For example ... This is rather a no-example. 1 hour ago, m_m said: it is also called divine proportion and God's Ratio It is not called so in math. And it is also a no-example. Your statement, "there's no truth without God" is refuted by the observation that there are irrefutably true mathematical statements without God. Edited February 13 by Genady 1
m_m Posted February 13 Author Posted February 13 Just now, Genady said: This is rather a no-example. It is not called so in math. And it is also a no-example. Your statement, "there's no truth without God" is refuted by the observation that there are irrefutably true mathematical statements without God. True statement is not the truth. And I am talking about the truth not only for math, but for everything. The ultimate and absolute Truth. Because you don't even know what a number is. Not how to use it, but what it is.
Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 2 minutes ago, m_m said: True statement is not the truth. And I am talking about the truth not only for math, but for everything. The ultimate and absolute Truth. Because you don't even know what a number is. Not how to use it, but what it is. Mathematical truth is the ultimate and absolute truth. Mathematics evolves by better and deeper understanding of this truth. Whatever you are talking about cannot be "everything" because it has counterexamples. Math provides the counterexamples.
m_m Posted February 13 Author Posted February 13 Just now, Genady said: It is not called so in math. Nonetheless, Divina proportione (15th century Italian for Divine proportion), later also called De divina proportione (converting the Italian title into a Latin one) is a book on mathematics written by Luca Pacioli and illustrated by Leonardo da Vinci, completed by February 9th, 1498[1] in Milan and first printed in 1509 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divina_proportione The number is the same, but mathematics are different. -2
Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 (edited) 3 minutes ago, m_m said: Nonetheless, Divina proportione (15th century Italian for Divine proportion), later also called De divina proportione (converting the Italian title into a Latin one) is a book on mathematics written by Luca Pacioli and illustrated by Leonardo da Vinci, completed by February 9th, 1498[1] in Milan and first printed in 1509 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divina_proportione It does not matter what it was called 600 years ago. It is not called so anymore. Regardless, the names of things are neither true nor false. Edited February 13 by Genady
m_m Posted February 13 Author Posted February 13 Just now, Genady said: It does not matter what it was called 600 years ago. This is exactly what I am talking about. You crossed out this sense. Your truth has changed.
Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 Just now, m_m said: This is exactly what I am talking about. You crossed out this sense. Your truth has changed. No truth of a proven mathematical statement has changed.
m_m Posted February 13 Author Posted February 13 (edited) Just now, Genady said: No truth of a proven mathematical statement has changed. Proven because of it's original meaning. People studied the world, which God created for us. As Trurl said. Edited February 13 by m_m -3
Genady Posted February 13 Posted February 13 1 minute ago, m_m said: Proven because of it's original meaning. No. Proven because it's true.
m_m Posted February 14 Author Posted February 14 It was not proven, it was observed, or recognized. Sorry, my mistake. Pi is the ratio of the circumference of any circle to the diameter of that circle. It is 3.14 The importance of pi has been recognized for at least 4,000 years. A History of Pi notes that by 2000 B.C., "the Babylonians and the Egyptians (at least) were aware of the existence and significance of the constant π," recognizing that every circle has the same ratio of circumference to diameter. Both the Babylonians and Egyptians had rough numerical approximations to the value of pi, and later mathematicians in ancient Greece, particularly Archimedes, improved on those approximations. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pi-and-how-did-it-originate/ And we have the Golden Ratio, phi, 1.618, which is recognized everywhere! Even in our bodies. "Johannes Kepler wrote that "the image of man and woman stems from the divine proportion. In my opinion, the propagation of plants and the progenitive acts of animals are in the same ratio". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio So, we consist of these patterns.
Genady Posted February 14 Posted February 14 3 hours ago, m_m said: It was not proven So, it had nothing to do with the previous discussion.
m_m Posted February 14 Author Posted February 14 Just now, Genady said: So, it had nothing to do with the previous discussion. The truth doesn't need to be proven, because it is the truth. -1
Genady Posted February 14 Posted February 14 3 minutes ago, m_m said: The truth doesn't need to be proven, because it is the truth. The point of the discussion is that there is truth without God.
m_m Posted February 14 Author Posted February 14 Just now, Genady said: The point of the discussion is that there is truth without God. No, there are only agreements or subjective opinions. -2
Genady Posted February 14 Posted February 14 11 minutes ago, m_m said: No, there are only agreements or subjective opinions. Mathematics is full of statements which are true regardless of any agreements or opinions. Here is a random example from a random math textbook:
Phi for All Posted February 14 Posted February 14 4 hours ago, m_m said: No, there are only agreements or subjective opinions. ! Moderator Note It seems like we've come to an impasse. Genady has scientific examples of truth without a god, and you refuse to acknowledge them. The discussion seems at an end, do you agree? It's pretty pointless from here on in.
m_m Posted February 14 Author Posted February 14 (edited) There are thousands of actual statements, but the truth is one. Edited February 14 by m_m -2
Phi for All Posted February 14 Posted February 14 1 hour ago, m_m said: There are thousands of actual statements, but the truth is one. ! Moderator Note OK. The staff doesn't usually moderate in threads where we're also involved, but this is a pretty open and shut case of soapboxing. Ignoring evidence and refusing to discuss in good faith, insisting on your position without dealing with the objections of others, none of this helps a discussion. Please follow the rules you agreed to when you joined. Thread closed.
Recommended Posts