Where numerous patterns are common knowledge for us, they were first-hand discoveries five or six thousand years ago.
Take for instance the Indian scholar Daksiputra Panini, known for his text Aṣṭādhyāyī, a sutra-style treatise on Sanskrit grammar, 3,959 verses or rules on linguistics, syntax and semantics
I just wonder how it must have been. He hears somebody say something and he knows that this person is referring to the beauty of some flowers.
Panini must have wondered, what is the relation between these uttered sounds and the reality I observe?
While the Greeks just looked at reality and wondered about its composition, Panini must have concluded:
if I understand the structure of these uttered sounds, the language, I might understand the structure of reality. He wondered about how language relates to reality.
Something similar might have been the case with mathematics. It must have begun with simple calculations of the number of harvested products or the measurement of a piece of land.
Then you discover a pattern in your calculations and you discover that there is a principle beneath this pattern and you find a2 + b2 = c2.
with this rule you even can predict what c2 will be if you know a and b. And then begins to deploy a whole world of mathematics.
And you are confronted with the question: what is the relation between my mathematics and reality? Where do you look first for the answer?
You look up in the sky. There must be the worlds of the gods. Those stars and their movements..... my mathematics applies to them! With my calculations I can even predict their next position.
And so begins Greek astronomy. Pythagoras (ca. 540 - 495 BC) would have suggested that all heavenly bodies move in perfect circles around a huge fire
and their relative distances could be expressed as the relation between 1,2,3 and 4 as a cosmic harmony.
The problem with this mathematical principle of the circle was that some heavenly bodies, planets as we know now, didn't move in a straight line.
Most of the time they moved for instance from West to East but from time to time from East to West. Something we now know as the retrograde movement of planets.
Besides that, some of these heavenly bodies now and then differed in brightness. As we now know this is due to the difference in distance from the earth due to their elliptical trajectory.
For centuries the Greeks pondered and puzzled about this and came up with all kinds of solutions.
Anyway, using the Greek astronomical calculation led to a picture of the trajectories, that looks like the one behind me.
Maybe the most famous astronomer in those days has been Claudius Ptolemaeus from Alexandria.He wrote the book "Almagest",
which gave an overview of ancient astronomy including principles, theses, deductions and observations.
He also created tables of positions and rules which were necessary to predict the positions of heavenly bodies.
One of the most important applications of his model was according to Ptolemaeus in astrology.
In its Tetrabiblos ('four books') he elaborates on the principles of horoscopes and the influence of the celestial bodies on earthly events.
The Tetrabiblos became the most influential work in Western astrology for more than 1500 years. And it gave astronomy centuries-long legitimacy.
Thank you for your attention again......
The Discussion
[13:15] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ㋡
[13:15] herman Bergson: I admit...it has been a warm and sunny day here...not the best weather for philosophy :-)
[13:15] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): so he is the father of the horoscope then?
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): fun fact, when i read these they often sort of match
[13:16] herman Bergson: If you leave out Indian astrology, I guess so Bejiita.....
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): sometimes not at all but vbery often there is something there
[13:16] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a bit fun
[13:17] herman Bergson: But what is really means is that since Pythagoras the Greek saw mathematics probably also as something mystical
[13:17] CB Axel: If you read the horoscope for a different sign, though, can't you make that match up, too?
[13:17] herman Bergson: Let's not discuss the sense and nonsense of astrology here, please :-)
[13:18] CB Axel: :)
[13:18] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): for ex if there is something going on at work ect i ofteh have gotten matches for that day with "productive event filled day" and things like that
[13:18] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): more then one time
[13:18] theo Velde is online.
[13:19] herman Bergson: No comment,, Bejiita ^_^
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but thats in one of these, all papers for ex use different horoscopes
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): still a bit fun concidence
[13:20] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): in any case the discovery of all these connections like with math, and here we also can see how it is truly the language of the universe
[13:20] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): as everything around us can be calculated
[13:21] herman Bergson: The main question here is ...how come that mathematics can be applied to real world things
[13:21] Dien (djdien.bailey) is offline.
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well thats what is so amazong
[13:21] herman Bergson: Mathematics is a pure brain product
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes but still
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it describes all these relation and it never lies (unless someone make a bad formula)¨
[13:22] herman Bergson: It doesn't seem to be deduced from empirical experiences
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): we can calculate and predict stuff of any kind
[13:22] herman Bergson: yes, Bejiita, and that is a very special feature of mathematics....
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and everything can be represented in math, color sound ect wich is what makes computers possible as they describe entire virtual worlds using only that
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): this place, my game projects ect, its all done with 100% math
[13:23] herman Bergson: indeed.... and we have a strong inclination to quantify everything
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and 2 values
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): 1 and 0
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): amazing that its possible
[13:24] herman Bergson: to me it is still an unanswered question
[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): another facinating thing is they used purley math to predict the higgs boson and its properties 40 years before the LHC was built, Then comes LHC, ZAAAAM! and sure it was there witl ALL the parameters as predicted
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): thats quite cool!
[13:27] herman Bergson: Since nonof you comes forward with an answer, I make it your homework to find the answer :-)
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well i have to dig deeper WHY this is the case
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but that can bequite fun
[13:28] herman Bergson: One google search can be "Why does mathematics work?"
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes
[13:29] CB Axel: Did we discover math or did we make it up to explain things.
[13:29] CB Axel: ?
[[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): good suggestion
[[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): is math man made or just laying out here waiting to be discovered
[13:29] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): head spins when going into these things
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): into the deep
[13:30] herman Bergson: I think that THAT is a hot discussion among mathematicians
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:30] herman Bergson: Is reality in itself mathematical?
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well indeed
[13:31] herman Bergson: Is mathematics empirically or brainily based?
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i mean it seems so since everything there is can be described 100% using it
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the relations are there
[13:31] herman Bergson: No Bejiita that isn't true.....
[13:31] CB Axel: Is there a god or is there just a master mathematical equation? :)
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): from pi to fractals
[13:32] herman Bergson: what can not be described 100% is described by using statistics
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): haha
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): there are lies, damn lies and statistics!
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): looool
[13:32] herman Bergson: you can't quantify human emotions for instance
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a classic
[13:32] herman Bergson: Indeed Bejiita
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): well THAT u can not indeed
[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but also we cant read others minds and thus directly measure them
[13:34] herman Bergson: You can statistically predict the possible occurence of an emotion with a probability of 80%
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): u can say using a programming analogy that emotions are only accessible in the local scope
[13:34] herman Bergson: but you can't predict the emotion of person A
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): = to yourself
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): only u can feel them
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): no
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and indeed i cant predict mine either
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): its all depending on whats happening right now
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and indeed u can not predict the future
[13:36] herman Bergson: Well, I'd say...have some fun with the query on "Why does mathematics work".....plenty of hits in Google....lots to study there :-)
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): now lets dwell into some randomly chaotic dice throwing pluppgames
[13:37] herman Bergson: Time to put our brains to rest, I'd say....
[13:37] herman Bergson: unless you still have an urgent question or remark :-))
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): however not truly random (computers cant be truly chaotic but good enough for dice games)
[13:37] herman Bergson: Ok.....Class dismissed .....
[13:38] bergfrau Apfelbaum: thank you Herman and class
[13:38] CB Axel: Thank you, Herman and class.
