Math does not account for the concept of nothing, yet when I ask my son what he learned in school on any given day, he inevitably replies "nothing."
If you take a geometric shape, any shape at all, and reduce it's scale by half and reduce it in scale by half once again and again and again...when does the shape completely disappear? (Hint: answer rhymes with "clever"). That's the paradox of mathematics.
The hypocrisy of math gives us the illusion that anything minus the same thing equals zero, even though we know this to be impossible.
4x5=12. 4x6=13. 4x7=14. Right or wrong?
I suppose it entirely depends on which rules are applied to the logic. Wrong if you adhere to standard base 10 mathematics. But what if 4x5 were calculated in base 18? Then 4x6 in base 21? And 4x7 in base 24?
At first I had thought that time travel had made simple math difficult to comprehend, instead it has helped me to accept math for the fraud that it truly is. Our assumption is that math gives us absolute truths about the universe, in particular the world we live in. The fact is that there are none to be had. We have merely given expression to concepts in attempt to explain the undefinable. It is in our bloodstream to decode, unlock and define, gaining purpose and meaning as if solving the mysteries of life will provide us with freedom.
Imagine, if you will, a party of four consisting of myself, Robert Lochaven, Coworker Mitch and Time (which is invited to every party, whether you sent him an invite or not). Suppose, for hypothetical purposes, time gets fed up and storms out, leaving the remaining three to exist forever, walking in circles like hands on a clock with no end. Imagine a world without a horizon line.
William Rowan Hamilton revealed his discovery of quaternions in the mid nineteenth century, which was a four term coordinate system, three of which were place designators, the last designating time, all to define rotation in a three-dimensional universe. If time leaves the party, the quaternion is incomplete leaving the remaining three components to rotate on a plane for eternity. These rules were given to define the physical space we live in, and I'm 85% certain that William Rowan Hamilton felt somehow more complete after this irrelevant discovery of his.
I wish I could tell you that the hypothetical scenario I have described above was original, but it is not.
Charles Dodgson wrote a very similar tale toward the end of that same century as a scathing commentary on the absurd state of mathematics, and in direct response to Hamilton's claims, at a time when complex equations were taking over a once stable and definitive numerical ideal. We know this man better as Lewis Carroll and he titled his written protest to this new math, "Alice In Wonderland."
Mr. Dodgson, a mathematics professor and one hell of a storyteller, was merely attempting to say that with math, one could prove opposite conclusions to be correct, depending on the set of specific rules being applied...rendering its premise ambiguous at best.
In his version, the March Hare, Dormouse and Mad Hatter are the three left at the party after Time departs. Alice happens upon the madness and eventually escapes the eternal "unhappy birthday" party.
In a universe where time is irrelevant and numbers have no specific value, life can be quite maddening. How can we interpret this world without confounding math to define our existence however we see fit? People like Coworker Mitch, Robert Lochaven and myself are left to run around in circles creating eternal sequences and patterns, destined to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, lest we find some way to break the cycle.
Damn this time travel.
If you take a geometric shape, any shape at all, and reduce it's scale by half and reduce it in scale by half once again and again and again...when does the shape completely disappear? (Hint: answer rhymes with "clever"). That's the paradox of mathematics.
The hypocrisy of math gives us the illusion that anything minus the same thing equals zero, even though we know this to be impossible.
4x5=12. 4x6=13. 4x7=14. Right or wrong?
I suppose it entirely depends on which rules are applied to the logic. Wrong if you adhere to standard base 10 mathematics. But what if 4x5 were calculated in base 18? Then 4x6 in base 21? And 4x7 in base 24?
At first I had thought that time travel had made simple math difficult to comprehend, instead it has helped me to accept math for the fraud that it truly is. Our assumption is that math gives us absolute truths about the universe, in particular the world we live in. The fact is that there are none to be had. We have merely given expression to concepts in attempt to explain the undefinable. It is in our bloodstream to decode, unlock and define, gaining purpose and meaning as if solving the mysteries of life will provide us with freedom.
Imagine, if you will, a party of four consisting of myself, Robert Lochaven, Coworker Mitch and Time (which is invited to every party, whether you sent him an invite or not). Suppose, for hypothetical purposes, time gets fed up and storms out, leaving the remaining three to exist forever, walking in circles like hands on a clock with no end. Imagine a world without a horizon line.
William Rowan Hamilton revealed his discovery of quaternions in the mid nineteenth century, which was a four term coordinate system, three of which were place designators, the last designating time, all to define rotation in a three-dimensional universe. If time leaves the party, the quaternion is incomplete leaving the remaining three components to rotate on a plane for eternity. These rules were given to define the physical space we live in, and I'm 85% certain that William Rowan Hamilton felt somehow more complete after this irrelevant discovery of his.
I wish I could tell you that the hypothetical scenario I have described above was original, but it is not.
Charles Dodgson wrote a very similar tale toward the end of that same century as a scathing commentary on the absurd state of mathematics, and in direct response to Hamilton's claims, at a time when complex equations were taking over a once stable and definitive numerical ideal. We know this man better as Lewis Carroll and he titled his written protest to this new math, "Alice In Wonderland."
Mr. Dodgson, a mathematics professor and one hell of a storyteller, was merely attempting to say that with math, one could prove opposite conclusions to be correct, depending on the set of specific rules being applied...rendering its premise ambiguous at best.
In his version, the March Hare, Dormouse and Mad Hatter are the three left at the party after Time departs. Alice happens upon the madness and eventually escapes the eternal "unhappy birthday" party.
In a universe where time is irrelevant and numbers have no specific value, life can be quite maddening. How can we interpret this world without confounding math to define our existence however we see fit? People like Coworker Mitch, Robert Lochaven and myself are left to run around in circles creating eternal sequences and patterns, destined to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, lest we find some way to break the cycle.
Damn this time travel.
Today's Jazz Hands appreciate Esther Inglis-Arkell and her Science History, and leave you with a creepy photograph taken in 1914.
Day two-hundred and ninety-eight complete.
No comments:
Post a Comment