# Reality is mathematics / Mathematics is reality ?

#### Write4U

Valued Senior Member
Which as you already know is impossible.
Yes, it's a theoretical problem. Of course it is impossible to test.

But it needs not be tested by repetition. We can predict a phenomenon and see what happens when we set to prove it.

If we ask the universe about a non-selfevident aspect and we ask it nicely (in proper mathematical terms) the universe will provide the answer.

This is how we managed to have the universe reveal the Higgs boson. We used the right mathematics and initial conditions and the universe said, ok you leave me no choice but to reveal the particle, but only for an instant. And behold the previously never seen Higgs particle became observable.

By changing a single value, the experiment would have failed.

Yes, it's a theoretical problem. Of course it is impossible to test.

But it needs not be tested by repetition. We can predict a phenomenon and see what happens when we set to prove it.

If we ask the universe about a non-selfevident aspect and we ask it nicely (in proper mathematical terms) the universe will provide the answer.

This is how we managed to have the universe reveal the Higgs boson. We used the right mathematics and initial conditions and the universe said, ok you leave me no choice but to reveal the particle, but only for an instant.
include infinite regression in all calculations and you will find an error margin exists.
"Nothing is perfect"
Zero is perfect

include infinite regression in all calculations and you will find an error margin exists.
"Nothing is perfect"
Zero is perfect
Equations are perfect. That's why they are called equations.
E=Mc^2 is a perfect equation. All universal constants are perfect, to our knowledge, no?

The perfection lies in the types of universal mathematical functions and the question of "hidden variables"
In physics, hidden-variable theories are held by some physicists who argue that the state of a physical system, as formulated by quantum mechanics, does not give a complete description for the system; i.e., that quantum mechanics is ultimately incomplete, and that a complete theory would provide descriptive categories to account for all observable behavior and thus avoid any indeterminism.
The existence of indeterminacy for some measurements is a characteristic of prevalent interpretations of quantum mechanics; moreover, bounds for indeterminacy can be expressed in a quantitative form by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
David Bohm proposed "hidden variables" but was rejected by his peers.
In Bohm's interpretation, the (nonlocal) quantum potential constitutes an implicate (hidden) order which organizes a particle, and which may itself be the result of yet a further implicate order: a superimplicate order which organizes a field.
Nowadays Bohm's theory is considered to be one of many interpretations of quantum mechanics which give a realist interpretation, and not merely a positivistic one, to quantum-mechanical calculations. Some consider it the simplest theory to explain quantum phenomena.
Nevertheless, it is a hidden-variable theory, and necessarily so. The major reference for Bohm's theory today is his book with Basil Hiley, published posthumously
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory#Bohm's_hidden-variable_theory

Last edited:
Extreme Example:
Foresight:
The chances of the Earth being as it is are incredibly poor (re:Rare Earth Hypothesis)
Hindsight:
The chance of Earth being as it is, 100%

Equations are perfect. That's why they are called equations.
E=Mc^2 is a perfect equation. All universal constants are perfect, to our knowledge, no?
You really need to look at Heisenberg's work, and Quantum theory, before you can make any claim to the impossible.

E=Mc^2 is a perfect equation. All universal constants are perfect, to our knowledge, no?
The value of M is subject to infinite regression.
The value of "c" is also subject to infinite regression. ( has been known to slow down)

there for the value of E ( which I might add is poorly defined any way) is actually only an estimate.
Therefore give two different objects of mass,
(E=Mc^2) - (E'=M'c'^2) =/= 0
As stated the only thing perfect is zero
Therefore the only universal constant is zero ( nothing)

Last edited:
The value of M is subject to infinite regression.
The value of "c" is also subject to infinite regression. ( has been known to slow down)

there for the value of E ( which I might add is poorly defined any way) is actually only an estimate.
Our estimates have no influence on the universal mathematics. If we are confused it is because we are asking the wrong questions. The universe is not confused, it is implacable. We are confused.

Equations are perfect. That's why they are called equations.
E=Mc^2 is a perfect equation.
Except that E=mc^2 is far from perfect - it is an approximation.

Ah. Never mind. QQ beat me to it.

Our estimates have no influence on the universal mathematics. If we are confused it is because we are asking the wrong questions. The universe is not confused, it is implacable. We are confused.
This is a tautology. The only reason you conclude that "universal mathematics" is somehow perfect is by assuming it to be so in the first place. That's the only way that - when our answers contradict it - you can say "it must be that our questions are wrong."

Our estimates have no influence on the universal mathematics. If we are confused it is because we are asking the wrong questions. The universe is not confused, it is implacable. We are confused.
Until the mathematician understands the advanced logic needed he will always be confused.
Being trapped in Galiliean Logic is not going to cut it. ( re: determinism)
At a level of quala chaos or confusion is all there is.

This is a tautology. The only reason you conclude that "universal mathematics" is somehow perfect is by declaring it to be so in the first place.
IMO, the Determinism declares that universal mathematics are perfect, regardless of "hidden" variables. When and if something happens it is because the mathematics determine it's actions.

The mathematics is part of the universal fabric. Patterns.

IMO, the Determinism declares that universal mathematics are perfect, regardless of "hidden" variables. When and if something happens it is because the mathematics determine it's actions.

The mathematics is part of the universal fabric. Patterns.
With all due respect:
Your approach, belief and understanding is wrong... simply wrong... to expect others to agree is being abusive.
someone has to say it... sorry...

Until the mathematician understands the advanced logic needed he will always be confused.
Being trapped in Galiliean Logic is not going to cut it. ( re: determinism)
At a level of quala chaos or confusion is all there is.
Yet even chaos gives rise to mathematical patterns and their related mathematical functions.

It used to be some kind of cosmic plasma, right? Look at it now, pretty orderly if you ask me.
We still have an occasional chaotic event, BH or SN, but hey from all that chaos new orders (patterns) are constantly being formed.

Yet even chaos gives rise to mathematical patterns and their related mathematical functions.

It used to be some kind of cosmic plasma, right? Look at it now, pretty orderly if you ask me.
We still have an occasional chaotic event, BH or SN, but hey from all that chaos new orders (patterns) are constantly being formed.

The chaos or confusion is current and ever present. It is a significant part of how the universe emerges in to the next moment. It could be said it affords change with in matter over time.
Research Quantum Chaos theory and check out the empirical evidence.
for starters...

With all due respect:
Your approach, belief and understanding is wrong... simply wrong... to expect others to agree is being abusive.
someone has to say it... sorry...
Lordie, the pain is unbearable....gimme a break....

This is not my invention, it is my interpretation of what is mainstream science, Perhaps viewed from a more obscured perspective. But I like Bohm and Tegmark. Are they abusive to your sensibilities??

It is kinda funny; I could quote from an established scientist and someone would call me a nut. It's really amusing.

If I am wrong explain why I am wrong .
Don't bore me with tautologies about my mental competence and intolerable mental constructs.
I am quite capable of understanding logic and reason.

And IMO, the universe is a "logical system", our minds are limited "reasoning systems"

It is kinda funny; I could quote from an established scientist and someone would call me a nut. It's really amusing.
do so... I look forward to it...

This is not my invention, it is my interpretation of what is mainstream science,
eh?

do so... I look forward to it...
Oh QQ, please. I provide more links for reference than any other poster here. These links are carefully chosen for credibility and scientific argument supporting the thrust of my posts.

I do not claim any "invention" worthy of a Nobel prize. I merely relate my perspective on the big questions, where almost all of us are on an even playing field....no one knows for a fact, no?

Only Theism claims Truth. I don't hear anyone accusing theists of being "abusive"....there, someone had to say it!

Oh QQ, please. I provide more links for reference than any other poster here. These links are carefully chosen for credibility and scientific argument supporting the thrust of my posts.

I do not claim any "invention" worthy of a Nobel prize. I merely relate my perspective on the big questions, where almost all of us are on an even playing field....no one knows for a fact, no?

Only Theism claims Truth. I don't hear anyone accusing theists of being "abusive"....there, someone had to say it!
No, I am sorry but you have left very little wriggle room this time.
You have stated that you can quote some famous scientist who claim that the universe is mathematics and not an invention of the human mind.
Please do so... I look forward to it.

With all due respect:
Your approach, belief and understanding is wrong... simply wrong... to expect others to agree is being abusive.
someone has to say it... sorry...
Thanks for taking the torch. I've been holding it for a while now.