Resolution of the question as to whether math is discovered or invented

[roydop]

ABSTRACT

The question as to whether mathematics is discovered or invented remains unresolved after 2500 years. The following line of reasoning resolves it.

The reason why all other theories have failed to resolve the issue is that they don’t begin the inquiry at the depth required. Rather than trying to fix the paradox, this paper reveals the incorrect perspective that gives rise to the paradox itself. Once the correct perspective is seen, the paradox is rendered irrelevant and impotent. The following line of reasoning reveals why it is that mathematics expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously. This paper reveals what math is.

Using pure reason based upon Occam’s Razor and direct human experience, an experiential phenomenon that expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously, is revealed. Through a series of statements, it will be shown how mathematics is the ongoing misinterpretation of a discovered message.

The argument presented must then be objectively scrutinized through the lens of Occam’s Razor to determine whether the theory “makes more sense” than the current conventional understanding of mathematics. No one knows why there is no number for the square root of -1. No one knows why 2+2 and 2x2 both have the same value. No one knows why general relativity and quantum mechanics are irreconcilable. No one knows why 1+1=2. No one knows the purpose of life.

Those who are able to see that the entire empire has no clothes; those who are able to transcend the programming, will come to know all of these things.

LINE OF REASONING

If mathematics expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously, then to understand why it appears as such we must be able to isolate the discovered part from the invented part. Is there an experiential phenomenon that expresses both discovered and invented qualities? If one can be found then perhaps it will be possible to investigate this phenomenon in a rigorous manner because it will be within our realm of experience.

Axiom 1: “A message is designed with the intent for it to be discovered.”

We will assume that mathematics is a message that has been discovered.

Axiom 2: “Mathematics is a discovered message.”

This fulfills the discovered expression of mathematics. Now we must find the invented expression.

Investigating the qualities of a message.
- Created/designed
- Purposeful
- Sharing information/knowledge
- Requires interpretation
o The manipulation of the information in an attempt to tease out recognizable patterns.
o Could this manipulation of the information be that which projects the invented quality of math?

The creator of the message would not necessarily have knowledge of all of the incorrect interpretations of the intended message. All the creator did was design the message with the intent to relate the singular message. Therefore, this paper makes the observation that the interpretation process of a discovered message, is an act of ongoing invention. Consider a condition where an interpretation of the message is taken to be the correct one, but in actuality it is incorrect. This would be the “creation event” of the ongoing misinterpretation. This is a condition that fulfills an initial creation event as well as the expression of continual invention. As the entire endeavor is based upon an incorrect premise, this process will continue until the initial error is recognized and the process thusly abandoned.

Axiom 3: The state of a discovered message that is undergoing interpretation expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously.

- Could mathematics be the ongoing misinterpretation of a message?
o Is this why math develops into ever-increasing abstraction as it evolves?
o Does this fit in with Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem?

If math is the misinterpretation of a message, then:
1. What is the message
2. How and where did we get it wrong?

The Message

Axiom 4: The number system/line is a linear expression of a cyclical process.

Upon reasoning this is held to be self-evident.

What other fundamental model of reality, of equal scope and importance as the number system, is a cyclical process? “Samsara”, which is the core theme to both Hindu and Buddhist religions, is a cyclical process. Both the number line and Samsara are expressions of infinite redundancy.

Axiom 5: “The number system is an expression/model of Samsara.”

Axiom 6: “The number system is a discovered message, and that message is: “You are in Samsara.”

If the number line is the message of Samsara, and an ongoing misinterpretation of a message expresses the act of invention, then where does the misinterpretation begin?

Axiom 7: The misinterpretation of the message expressed by the number system begins with the 379-page “proof” that 1+1=2 contained in “Principia Mathematica.” The entire concept of “quantity” is in error.

Why does it require 379 pages to “prove” that 1+1=2? How many people throughout its existence, have been able to read that document and say that: “It makes sense.” The truth of the matter is that humanity has relegated the validity of mathematics to a third-party authority. In response, Occam cuts those 379 pages down to a single sentence:

Axiom 8: “One plus one equals two because every single last one of us believes that it does.”

Thought experiment: If mathematics, beginning at the creation of “quantity” is indeed the ongoing misinterpretation of the message of Samsara being expressed by the number system, would this explain:

A. All of the logical inconsistencies within mathematics; why they are inherent within math.
B. All of the problems within physics; why they are inherent within physics.
C. Why humanity has lost all purpose and meaning to life.
o The message of Samsara is showing us the purpose of life: to escape Samsara.
o Humanity is going mad and is killing all life on the planet. We have lost our way.

The concept of “quantity” is a belief. This belief is programmed to be accepted as truth/fact, through the teaching of mathematics in school and all of academia.

THE CAUSAL LINK BETWEEN MATHEMATICS AND THE NATURAL WORLD

There is no evidence whatsoever that mathematics, which is either symbols on a 2D medium, or thoughts in a mathematician’s consciousness, has any causal relationship with the natural world. Mathematics cannot be shown to grow the trees or give rise to the elements, but there is an abundance of directly observable evidence that the technology that math creates, cuts down the trees and rips the element from the earth.

Axiom 9: “The direct causal link between mathematics and the natural world, is technology. These technologies:

A. Has humanity helplessly addicted to the screen.
B. Has humanity completely dependent upon the technology for the operation of society and its survival.
C. IS KILLING ALL LIFE ON THE PLANET!

It is not possible to be more “wrong” than killing all life on a planet. Therefore, the technology that math produces and operates, is an abomination.”

We are now positioned to resolve the question: “Is mathematics discovered or invented?”

Mathematics expresses both discovered and invented qualities simultaneously because it is the ongoing misinterpretation of a discovered message. The discovered part of math (the message) is the number system. The message is: “Humanity is in Samsara.” The misinterpretation of the message as expressing “quantity” has led to the loss of purpose to life and the creation and operation of technology. In turn, this technology:

A. Has humanity helplessly addicted to the screen.
B. Has humanity completely dependent upon the technology for the operation of society and its survival.
C. Is killing all life on the planet.

This explains:

1. Why humanity is devolving into madness and greater suffering.
2. Every single logical inconsistency within math.
3. Why math irrevocably increases in abstraction as it develops.
4. Why quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity are irreconcilable.
5. Every single problem within physics.

Conclusion:

The number system is the discovered message: “You are in Samsara.” The creation of “quantity”/“counting” with the 379-page “proof” presented within “Principia Mathematica” is incorrect. This ongoing misinterpretation is what expresses the invented aspect of math. The entire mathematical/scientific endeavor has been in error. Math is mathematicians chasing their tail.

The reasoning presented in this paper is based upon your ability to reason, free from the influence of beliefs. If you don’t fully understand how it is that 1+1=2, but you are able to understand how math expresses both discovered and invented qualities because it is the ongoing misinterpretation of a message, then it is only the belief that math is true and correct that prevents you from seeing the truth. This belief in math requires a degree of “sweeping things under the rug”; an acceptance of the glaring inconsistencies contained within mathematics.

The theory that makes sense to you, and to all humans, must be the one that is followed. Not one mathematician throughout all of history has been able to resolve the question: “Is mathematics discovered or invented?” This is due to the blind acceptance of the concept of “quantity” as being valid and correct. Now that the error has been revealed, the resolution has naturally emerged.

It is difficult for one to see that the emperor has no clothes. It is almost impossible to see the entire scientific empire naked. Are you capable of the almost impossible? Are you able to see through the programming?

[roydop]

https://youtu.be/0j8-FYULDuQ?si=fB72oG5GXCbK0AM0

[godelian]

No one knows why 2+2 and 2x2 both have the same value.

This problem amounts to looking for the solutions for:

a + a = a x a

Which is in fact a quadratic equation:

a²-2a=0

After factoring:

a(a-2)=0

This polynomial has two roots:

a=0 or a=2

Hence, the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable not just by the number 2 but also by the number 0.

In other words, 0+0 and 0x0 both also have the same value.

[Impenitent]

0+0, 0-0 and 0*0 all have the same value

0/0 still needs a dictionary

-Imp

[roydop]

No one knows why 2+2 and 2x2 both have the same value.

This problem amounts to looking for the solutions for:

a + a = a x a

Which is in fact a quadratic equation:

a²-2a=0

After factoring:

a(a-2)=0

This polynomial has two roots:

a=0 or a=2

Hence, the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable not just by the number 2 but also by the number 0.

In other words, 0+0 and 0x0 both also have the same value.

No, it's showing WHY there are these anomalies.

Are you understanding the scope of what is being revealed? The entirety of mathematics is an ongoing error

https://youtu.be/0j8-FYULDuQ?si=hpnWN0BHYPSON28V

[godelian]

No, it's showing WHY there are these anomalies.

The fact that the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable is not an anomaly. Why would it be an anomaly? What alternative outcome did you expect?

[Skepdick]

No, it's showing WHY there are these anomalies.

The fact that the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable is not an anomaly. Why would it be an anomaly? What alternative outcome did you expect?

Well, any one of these...

Not satisfiable? e.g ¬Sat ≡ ⊤
Neither satisfiable nor not satisfiable? e.g ¬(Sat ∧ ¬Sat) ≡ ⊤
Both satisfiable and not satisfiable? Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤

[godelian]

Both satisfiable and not satisfiable? Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤

Well, classical logic sticks to:

Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊥

In the tetralemma, such as in Buddhist logic, "Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤" could possibly be made to work.

[Skepdick]

Both satisfiable and not satisfiable? Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤

Well, classical logic sticks to:

Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊥

In the tetralemma, such as in Buddhist logic, "Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤" could possibly be made to work.

Your statement is still trapped in Classical logic. Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊤ is just the complement of Sat ∧ ¬Sat ≡ ⊥ via LEM/negation.
I am not saying that ALL contradictions are true as a mere knee-jerk negation to "ALL contradictions are false".

I am saying that the truth-value of Sat ∧ ¬Sat is contextually decidable; and not always false.

Which is just another way of saying "contradictions don't entail everything by trivialization"; or "some contradictions are computationally meaningful".

Really, I am pointing at exceptions/exception handling. Any 13 year old programmer understands the idea of localizing "explosions" in try/catch blocks, then they grow up, become philosophers and develop some sort of dysfunction where they can't tolerate any contradictions without trivializing their entire worldview.

Those very same idiots are using software which wouldn't be able to function if the principle of explosion were true.

Paraconsistent logic is the one true logic. Consistent logics are vacuous.

[Skepdick]

...

That's a really long-winded way to go about it.

All axioms are invented.
All consequences thereof (theorems) are discovered.

[roydop]

No, it's showing WHY there are these anomalies.

The fact that the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable is not an anomaly. Why would it be an anomaly? What alternative outcome did you expect?

You have missed the entire point. The fact that mathematics is capable of generating patterns from the cyclical process that is numbers, doesn't mean that it the correct meaning of the system.

The meaning of numbers has nothing to do with addition or multiplication. The meaning of numbers is to show humanity the way out of suffering.

[roydop]

No, it's showing WHY there are these anomalies.

The fact that the pattern "a + a = a x a" is satisfiable is not an anomaly. Why would it be an anomaly? What alternative outcome did you expect?

The anomaly is that "2" is the only number to which this applies. This destroys the logical consistency of mathematics. But, as I said in the video, mathematicians simply sweep it under the rug and continue in ignorance. They are ignoring the places where math doesn't make sense. These places where math doesn't make sense is showing that MATH DOESN'T MAJE SENSE!

The entire system is based upon an INCORRECT BELIEF (that the concept of "quantity" is correct)

https://youtu.be/0j8-FYULDuQ?si=IxVKNND38-KlY89y

[accelafine]

Whether it's discovered or invented, it still has an 's' on the end.
Thorry about your lithp.

[Flannel Jesus]

Whether it's discovered or invented, it still has an 's' on the end.
Thorry about your lithp.

Fun fact, the term "math" predates "maths".

https://www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/math-vs-maths/

[roydop]

Whether it's discovered or invented, it still has an 's' on the end.
Thorry about your lithp.

You're the only person that has ever said that I have a lisp.

AND you completely missed the point

This is the greatest revelation in human history and no one here at this "philosophy" forum, can see it. It's surreal how no one is capable of basic independent reasoning