Stephen Hawking says that he chose physics as it is "the most fundamental of the sciences." I happen to disagree. Isn't understanding our frame of the world more fundamental to understanding how we perceive science? That is, I'd argue that the study of the mind, and more philosophical statements and ideas are more fundamental to science since it shows us how we exist and thus experience those dimensions described in physics. Hawkings says that physics can help him describe the universe around him, but I think the frame from which you view that world, the mind, is more valuable and useful for describing that world.

Or you might argue neither are more fundamental than the other, and that this is just a perception of importance that is simply a social justification for an individuals particular field.

What's your opinion? I'm thinking, considering the more technical orientation of the crowd, that you may all agree with Hawking. That isn't to say that I dislike physics (half of my bookshelf is theoretical physics, and I don't claim to know a thing about it) it's just that the studies of the mind seem to tell me more about the world around me than the actual hard data and numbers and theories related to time and space.

So, if it's not physics, what is it? A science that proposes "studies of the mind" ...such as psychology?

God damnit, I was looking for that comic while saberopus posted it.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png

And I have to go with XKCD on this. Psychology is way less fundamental than physics.


[hotlinking is 4 losrz]

But as 3 dimensional people in a 6 dimensional world, our perception of things is our limitation of knowledge, and our experience. Time itself is the reason we question certainty and "fate." If we experienced time like we do space, we'd understand the world differently. That is, our experience is a strong expression of our world, as it's a "model" of the universe itself. Is that making sense? I mean, that comic is being experienced through language and ideas, and those expressions are why the comic is funny and compelling.

I wouldn't class math as science. it's too abstract. We use it to model reality but it doesn't even come close to modelling it accurately. Physics is the study of real, raw reality.

But it uses math as a model itself.

You're failing to make a distinction between science and philosophy. Science is empirical, philosophy is not.

And it's not a model constrained by our perceptions.

And our perceptions are themselves a result of that model, as illustrated in the comic.

Therefore, math must be the most fundamental.

What.

We're four dimensional anyway. And we can't see anything beyond those dimensions so the universe might as well be four dimensional too.

No matter what Kirby thinks about how psychology filters our perception of physics, it can't change which is more fundamental. 2+2 = 4 is TRUE, independently of any psychology.

Yeah, I guess math it is. It relies totally on deductive reasoning from arbitrarily true definitions.

'Fields arranged by purity' confused me because I thought it was just science. Math is certainly the most pure field, but physics is the most pure inductive science.

I don't know guys. Last Tuesday, I could have swore it felt kinda like 2+2=5.

You know, those kind of days.

The second I saw this I thought of the xkcd.

so is the most fundamental math 1+1=2?

0=0

It's not fundamental, it's just a subset of logic. It's a tool.

You're a tool.

Your mom's a tool.

No math. No science.

Math wins. (although at 0800 I'd wish calc would CFAD)

Hurray, we agree.

Also, XKCD came to mine as I read the thread title.

I seriously think JediKirby is taking some mind-altering substance.

JediKirby is a mind-altering substance

Yeah. I used to think dwarves were cool little men with big axes and beards.

Now I know they are just *******s on the internet.

I am required to say theology.

"Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."

God did it. John 1:3

[edit]

But if that's not considered a science, then I'm going to have to go with marine biology. Shark week is fundamental.

...lol

The most fundamental science is Time Cube.

god cubit what the cube is this cubey cubeness! this has to be the single most confusing/nauseating thing i have ever seen.

that's because you are stupid. and evil.

this will explain it
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn2UCqL5qyo

There is proof that 3 dimensional
math is erroneous, and that linear
Time is actually of a Cubic nature.
Ignoring Cubium indicts you evil.

Educated fools can't comprehend Cubicism.

Burgeronomics



And reverse burgeronomics

Maths isn't a science, it's a toolkit. It's like saying your utility belt is Batman.

I am Batman.

burgeronomics sounds tastier than the other options

I have no idea what you're talking about and I'm pretty sure you're more at fault for it than I am.

Kirby, you're assigning some kind of metaphysical value to the mind. There's nothing special about us. No "philosophical" meaning. It's all physics.


You're right that math isn't science, it's math. But you're wrong to say it doesn't model the real world accurately. What do you think physics uses to model the real world? Math. Sure, many mathematical models are too precise to model the real world with perfect accuracy, but that is the fault of the model, not the fault of mathematics itself.

I was thinking more along the lines that all area / volume calculations are obviously estimates because the math makes no attempt to compensate for the physics

Huh?

The surface area of your computer desk is actually a lot more than its width * height at the macro level. Each atom that forms the surface of your desk has an outer electron shell with a unique shape that affects its volume.. microscopically, the surface of that desk is covered with deep valleys and looming mountains. So obviously the surface area is much, much greater than a typical area calculation would have you believe. It's a very rough estimate, off by probably orders of magnitude.