I'm aware of that.

@fishfry — Ben Ngai

Actually doesn't work without (invisible) quotes around the name, after the @. The @ button does it for you.

I feel the universe can be pure math but it can require so many calculations.

A lot of the time, calculations in terms of physics are estimates unless your using such fine precision measuring tools.
We see this in things like the time formula; it does not account for the initial energy needed to reach X speed or the energy required to slow down or even the forces that act on the object during the whole process.
This is why we use averages to patch up such vague calculations.

Sure in a math test an average speed of a car driving is what it states but it in the real world that average speed will not be consistent due to external factors such as wind, traffic lights, weight of the car with more or less gas, foot pressure on the accelerator and so on.

vague questions = vague answers.

A lot of the time, calculations in terms of physics are estimates unless your using such fine precision measuring tools.
We see this in things like the time formula; it does not account for the initial energy needed to reach X speed or the energy required to slow down or even the forces that act on the object during the whole process.
This is why we use averages to patch up such vague calculations. — Tiberiusmoon

Okay, this is true of mathematics. Analogy everything is done in euclidean geometry, but that doesn't account for gravity bending space.

Another point geometries in mathematics have no real world counterpart (think perfect squares and circles), but they give lots of insight to reality. So much so that powerful mathematics are built on those concepts.

Maybe we have it backwards. instead of pure math (logic included) as a tool to help describe the universe. This universe is an expression of pure math with with approximation due to it's initial rules that allow for the universe to think on itself (say the anthropic principle).

Wow, thi

↪Ben Ngai The best theories of physics we currently have represent the universe as set of overlapping kinds of mathematical spaces (differentiable manifolds) that obey certain rules that make them count also as mathematical objects called groups, where every point in the space is a specially symmetric square matrix of complex numbers, a different size of square for each of the different spaces.

We know already that that is not a perfectly accurate model, but it’s somewhere in the ballpark, and whatever the correct mathematical model of reality is, there’s no reason to think that there is anything more to reality itself than just exactly that math. — Pfhorrest

Sorry for missing this, but wow. This is a brilliant insight. No words. I need to process again sorry for ignoring.

I made an oversight. it should non-euclidean geomerty with complex numbers. Just a quick curiousry note. Maybe it's even more complex than that. Hypercomplex (number).I have no clue what a hypercomplex is, but i have google that made it pop up.

There is a new theory under development that replaces that set of different fields I talked about with a single field made up of a kind of hypercomplex number called octonions:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-octonion-math-that-could-underpin-physics-20180720/

I'm over this topic. I already intuited all the unanswered questions in metaphysics i care about (probably vastly wrong on most) using this theory. I'm doing research on sports medicine/space trave/space warfare (specifically how to defend against space war thinking capture tech and reverse engineer)/and anti aging right now.

They're all related, but i don't have the resources to do it so i'lll be hypothetical.

If you have any questions feel free to ask and I might give an explanation on what's going on.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/o544st/open_letter_to_space_x_and_nasa/

but that doesn't account for gravity bending space. — Ben Ngai

I will have to double check your understanding of gravity, its not your fault its just some people are taught Newtons law of gravity rather than Einstiens law of gravity (the theory of relativity)
More info here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRgBLVI3suM

Why exactly space distorts because of matter is another question.

Okay, i don't need to understand every detail of every theory to realize that this explains a lot if true.

Honestly it's a straw man. because this is a construction of the universe using mathematics so all i have to do is tweak the construction.

So I know nothing about physics and I barely am knowledgeable about math, but I do know that this has tons of predictive value if true.

Okay, i don't need to understand every detail of every theory to realize that this explains a lot if true. — Ben Ngai

Of course by the principle of explosion, a theory that's false explains even more! :starstruck:

I didn't a logical fallacy.. i used facts incorrectly So another straw man...

Honestly, this is kind of boring and a waste of time. Why not help fix my idea instead of just shooting holes it in and making me do the research to fix it. I thought philosophy and science was collaborative to work together to discover stuff not to just shoot down ideas for fun.

Honestly, this is kind of boring and a waste of time. Why not help fix my idea instead of just shooting holes it in and making me do the research to fix it. I thought philosophy and science was collaborative to work together to discover stuff not to just shoot down ideas for fun. — Ben Ngai

I made a logic joke. You are a little off target. Do you need me to explain the joke? You said that a theory would explain a lot if true. I pointed out that by the principle of explosion -- the logical principle that a false antecedent implies anything at all -- a theory that's false explains even more. That's a little logic joke. A false theory explains everything. Then I put a smiley at the end to emphasize the jokitude. Ok so it wasn't the funniest joke ever. I can see that. I'm going to branch into a different universe now in which I never mentioned it at all.

But if my lighthearted and clearly unsuccessful attempt at logic humor was unclear, I do apologize.

So, three logicians walk into a truck stop diner. The waitress walks over and asks, "Do y'all want coffee?" The first logician says, "I don't know." The second logician says, "I don't know." The third logician says, "Yes!"

That's another logic joke in case that was unclear. One that takes a moment's thought.

Hahaha sorry, That is a good joke, just hard to tell over the internet. and I really like this idea the more i think of it as i think it has more and more accurate predictive value.

Hahaha sorry, That is a good joke, just hard to tell over the internet. and I really like this idea the more i think of it as i think it has more and more accurate predictive value. — Ben Ngai

They even study logic that contains inconsistencies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraconsistent_logic

Maybe you just descrbied the logic in this universe and maybe this unvierse is filled with inconsitences (like say Banach–Tarski paradox)