Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SeachRE who wrote (325568)	12/4/2002 8:23:08 AM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Saying that mathematics can or should advance beyond human endeavors is not a religious diatribe. Certainly as well, those who do have religious precepts are quite possibly smarter than yourself. * * *

To: SeachRE who wrote (325568)	12/4/2002 11:29:17 AM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

SearchMe, re:Science requires the observation of a phenomenon, deductive analysis of occurrence, and experimentation to reproduce the same event, in a nutshell. That is not the definition of Science but is better known as the Scientific method. Science: "the field of study which attempts to describe and understand the nature of the universe in whole or part." Simulations using Computers and mathematical models are repeatable and observable experiments that employ the Scientific Method. For exmaple, weather prediction or Nuclear testing.

To: SeachRE who wrote (325568)	12/4/2002 12:03:18 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Dear me Search. You agree with me and then turn right around and simply state, with not a dang shred of evidence, that math "as a whole" is exact. Math is prolly about the best we can do here in petty nature. But this phrase "as a whole" of yours is quite meaningless when an entire universe of faith exists within math right under your nose. I mean DANG! What is a number any dang way? Nuthin' but a bunch of dang faith. Hehe. Ni tell the troof. You just hatched dat mess and threw it out to see if would save yo' ignorant behind. Well it don't be savin' nuthin'. What is 'the whole' of math? If such a dang "whole" exists, you dang sho don't know nuthin' about it. When you claim math is ipso facto "exact," you really make a claim of faith. It is based on intuition, a certainty of what you cannot see. But you have no natural and utterly objective proof of such a thing. The idea is dang oxymoronic.