I think people don't need ideology or identity to go about their day to day lives. Mathematics falls under "language" so comparing it to philosophy which I consider a type of literature or "understanding" is vague and a type of belief.
Literally yesterday I started a book on Gödel and his work in philosophy and mathematics. Good lord, it was a book in the library and I didn’t even check it out.
@@parkerstroh6586The tech is on another level now. Theyre able to scan and translate thoughts in your brain by using the waves emitting from our devices.
Let's take the wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics as an example and explore how we could formalize it using logic, math, and physics within the monadological framework. First, let's define our basic entities and relations: - Let M be the set of all monads (fundamental psychophysical entities). - Let Ω be the set of all possible observational contexts or perspectives. - Let R be a relation on M × Ω, where (m, ω) ∈ R means monad m manifests observable properties in context ω. Now, let's formalize the wave-particle duality: - Let W be the set of wave-like properties (e.g., interference, diffraction). - Let P be the set of particle-like properties (e.g., localization, quantization). - For any monad m ∈ M and context ω ∈ Ω, we have: - (m, ω) ∈ R ⟹ (∃w ∈ W: m manifests w in ω) ∨ (∃p ∈ P: m manifests p in ω) - (∃w ∈ W, p ∈ P: m manifests both w and p in ω) ⟹ (w and p are complementary in ω) In other words, for any given monad and observational context, the monad will manifest either wave-like or particle-like properties, and if it manifests both, these properties will be complementary (i.e., not simultaneously measurable with arbitrary precision). We can formalize this further using quantum logic and the mathematical framework of Hilbert spaces: - Let H be a Hilbert space representing the state space of a quantum system. - Let |ψ⟩ ∈ H be a state vector representing the state of a quantum monad. - Let W and P be projection operators on H representing wave-like and particle-like observables, respectively. - The complementarity of wave-like and particle-like properties can be expressed as: - WP|ψ⟩ ≠ PW|ψ⟩ (non-commutativity of observables) - ΔW⋅ΔP ≥ ℏ/2 (Heisenberg uncertainty principle) Here, the non-commutativity of the wave and particle operators and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle formalize the idea that wave-like and particle-like properties are complementary and cannot be simultaneously measured with arbitrary precision. Finally, we can connect this to the physical world by noting that this formalism accurately predicts the results of experiments like the double-slit experiment, where quantum entities exhibit both wave-like interference patterns and particle-like localization depending on the experimental setup. In summary, by using tools from logic, math (Hilbert spaces and projection operators), and physics (quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle), we can formalize the wave-particle duality within the monadological framework as: - Quantum monads manifest either wave-like or particle-like properties depending on the observational context. - When a monad manifests both wave-like and particle-like properties, these properties are complementary and cannot be simultaneously measured with arbitrary precision. - This formalism accurately predicts the results of real-world quantum experiments. This demonstrates how the monadological framework can provide a coherent and mathematically rigorous foundation for understanding and formalizing the both/and nature of quantum reality. Similar approaches could be used to formalize other both/and examples using the appropriate logical, mathematical, and physical tools.
I am having an aneurysm trying to understand what you are trying to say? Ironic or unironic? Are you trying to make fun of tge point of view or are you the point of view? 10/10
Welp, logic thx for your service. Now because Descrates formalized the numbers and the basic mathematical operations with rigorous used of logic that is built upon centuries by Aristotle to stoic to scholastic philosophers until to the scientific revolution. Now these non-mathematicians who happened to make a video is claiming something that doesn't exist.
The incompetence of such hubris is profound. You do realize zero is a philosophical representation of a number right? Where in the universe does nothing exist? Your brain?
It depends, we still don't know if math is created in the brain or if its is the logic of the universe. Look at pi, it's a fundamental constant that don't change depending where or when you do the experimentation and is not ruled by beliefs. The notation (π) or base (0-10) may change, but it always appears on scientific fenomena and formulas. Its just too complicated...
What's funny about math is that there are big questions about it that inevitably turn philosophical if not in content than in the disposition of the problem. "Is math a human construct, or is math real? And what if it's both, what does that even mean?" Trying to answer this inevitably turns into some real philosophical bullshit. The engineers are lucky, they don't care. They just use math and make cool shit.
About the allegory of the cave, attitudes of fans towards the Breaking Bad house prove succinctly that people cannot distinguish between a wagon and the shadow of a wagon
All the science was developed from philosophy. Philosophy was actually the origin of science and that means also math. There is also a field called philosophy of mathematics. But I can say that there is also a lot of garbage philosophy out there.
Math existed long before Philosophy, actually Philosophy was created during Greek golden period 5-4 century BC , Math was inventrd when man come on the earth
1:33 exavier? I remeber my friend was obsessed with this show. He would take acid and just watch the show. Watching the show sober is un fucking comfortable enough, idk how he watches it while tripping. Shittiest show. Never watch it.
STEM losers: bUt mAtHs Is UsEfUl Philosopher: What is usefulness? Philosophers define, and STEM works within those confines of ontology and epistemology
Give me one absolute and true universal definition of what usefulness is by philosophers along with the meaning of all the words i use here (no resorting to any primal definition or synonyms)
@@heartsofiron4ever so you're basically conceding that not even philosophers are settled and can definitively define things for scientists or lay people for that matter.
How is philosophy useless? what is your idea of what is useful and what is useless? and how can the fact that a man is racist mean that his works and his occupation/specialty/profession/field etc automatically make what he has said wrong and make his philosophy all wrong or useless or bad? what sparked the fire in you to hate philosophy? and how can 1 murder carried out by a philosopher to a mathematician define all of philosophy, and what does math destroy philosophy at? misogyny and racism is bad but how does it completely define philosophy for you how does one example make everything bad? did Hitler make all Germans bad? you highlight the source saying "ethical decision making" while googling what philosophy is good at, is that not able to help you in shopping like you said was most important? and how you go on your nihilistic rant at the end is just worthless and funny, what led you to believe this, and why defend math if everything is going to be hell on earth in a infinite death loop? this is disappointing and senseless
What defines satire in world dominated by irony and post ironic humor ? In a theoretical future where every single human on the planet speaks in a sarcastic tone, could one argue that satire would actually transition into our current conception of truth and facts ?
worth every penny
fr, this is a masterpiece
This is an interesting philosophy you hold
BWAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
I think people don't need ideology or identity to go about their day to day lives.
Mathematics falls under "language" so comparing it to philosophy which I consider a type of literature or "understanding" is vague and a type of belief.
It's terrifying how well UA-cam's algorithm has profiled me.
I THOUGHT THE SAME
Literally yesterday I started a book on Gödel and his work in philosophy and mathematics. Good lord, it was a book in the library and I didn’t even check it out.
@@parkerstroh6586The tech is on another level now. Theyre able to scan and translate thoughts in your brain by using the waves emitting from our devices.
Same
Watching this felt like a bad trip.
I'm glad you feel that way
a bad trip down stupid street
Thank our non specified creator that I'm a psychologist and nothing in this video concerns my field of SCIENCE
wait until u find out the first guy that called himself a psychologist was a PHILOSOPHER, u philosophizing gunk
I love that the guy is talking about things! 🔥🔥☝️
watch as people watch this and do not pick up on what the joke was
I mean the possibility of math being true is a pholosophical topic so idk how math beats it
math is true, we literally use math to replicate our world in the digtal world, to replicate thought with convolutional neural networks.
@@yesyes-om1po well brother, how can you know you aren't a brain in a vat?
@@yesyes-om1postill philisopical if you talk about it.
Great satire
I think too much, I can't finalize on the actual meaning of the video, AAAAAHHH it's actually fcking with my brain.
Never saw this channel in my life, but I love it. Keep doing what you do man, remember me when you're popular.
Let's take the wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics as an example and explore how we could formalize it using logic, math, and physics within the monadological framework.
First, let's define our basic entities and relations:
- Let M be the set of all monads (fundamental psychophysical entities).
- Let Ω be the set of all possible observational contexts or perspectives.
- Let R be a relation on M × Ω, where (m, ω) ∈ R means monad m manifests observable properties in context ω.
Now, let's formalize the wave-particle duality:
- Let W be the set of wave-like properties (e.g., interference, diffraction).
- Let P be the set of particle-like properties (e.g., localization, quantization).
- For any monad m ∈ M and context ω ∈ Ω, we have:
- (m, ω) ∈ R ⟹ (∃w ∈ W: m manifests w in ω) ∨ (∃p ∈ P: m manifests p in ω)
- (∃w ∈ W, p ∈ P: m manifests both w and p in ω) ⟹ (w and p are complementary in ω)
In other words, for any given monad and observational context, the monad will manifest either wave-like or particle-like properties, and if it manifests both, these properties will be complementary (i.e., not simultaneously measurable with arbitrary precision).
We can formalize this further using quantum logic and the mathematical framework of Hilbert spaces:
- Let H be a Hilbert space representing the state space of a quantum system.
- Let |ψ⟩ ∈ H be a state vector representing the state of a quantum monad.
- Let W and P be projection operators on H representing wave-like and particle-like observables, respectively.
- The complementarity of wave-like and particle-like properties can be expressed as:
- WP|ψ⟩ ≠ PW|ψ⟩ (non-commutativity of observables)
- ΔW⋅ΔP ≥ ℏ/2 (Heisenberg uncertainty principle)
Here, the non-commutativity of the wave and particle operators and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle formalize the idea that wave-like and particle-like properties are complementary and cannot be simultaneously measured with arbitrary precision.
Finally, we can connect this to the physical world by noting that this formalism accurately predicts the results of experiments like the double-slit experiment, where quantum entities exhibit both wave-like interference patterns and particle-like localization depending on the experimental setup.
In summary, by using tools from logic, math (Hilbert spaces and projection operators), and physics (quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle), we can formalize the wave-particle duality within the monadological framework as:
- Quantum monads manifest either wave-like or particle-like properties depending on the observational context.
- When a monad manifests both wave-like and particle-like properties, these properties are complementary and cannot be simultaneously measured with arbitrary precision.
- This formalism accurately predicts the results of real-world quantum experiments.
This demonstrates how the monadological framework can provide a coherent and mathematically rigorous foundation for understanding and formalizing the both/and nature of quantum reality. Similar approaches could be used to formalize other both/and examples using the appropriate logical, mathematical, and physical tools.
Me who loves category theory: good lord.
Very deep and phylosophical
I almost got angry. Well done
mathematics is a form of philosophy. also this is complete bunk.
Philosophy and math are fields of logic, but are mostly separate from each other.
pls say you watched the whole video because if you did this comment is 20x funnier
And everyone knows lógic is a field of psychology.
@@rafaelsilvademedeiros7219 Math is a form of philosophy. logic, the lowest thought, has nothing to do with either.
@@lizzienandra2789 Why would I watch clickbait?
Without Philosophy your society would not exist.
As someone who is fond of both, I highly suggest not to hold grudges on either. Banger vids btw.
As a mathematics enthusiast, great work!
4:26 oh i see, you're an insane person
I am having an aneurysm trying to understand what you are trying to say? Ironic or unironic? Are you trying to make fun of tge point of view or are you the point of view? 10/10
Kurt Gödel died of starvation, and he was also a philosopher.
Shostakovich's 8th. Oh, yes
Clearly mathematics is the superior logical study, as Homer Simpson can adequately use it to disprove god via proof.
more people need to be saying this, its insane how they've gone thousands of years without much criticism.
Who's gonna tell em
15 euros well spent
Fantastic choice of music
Gotta say, fantastic choice of music
The least hateful essay on philosophy.
I understood about 2 words in this entire video
Wtf is 911 in the background 😭
Something tells me this is personal.
oh yeah. words
The fact that this isn't sincere has me triggered.
Welp, logic thx for your service. Now because Descrates formalized the numbers and the basic mathematical operations with rigorous used of logic that is built upon centuries by Aristotle to stoic to scholastic philosophers until to the scientific revolution. Now these non-mathematicians who happened to make a video is claiming something that doesn't exist.
yeah sure man I'll incorporate that into my ideology
Lore of Why Math Destroys Philosophy momentum 100
The incompetence of such hubris is profound.
You do realize zero is a philosophical representation of a number right? Where in the universe does nothing exist? Your brain?
its a joke
It depends, we still don't know if math is created in the brain or if its is the logic of the universe. Look at pi, it's a fundamental constant that don't change depending where or when you do the experimentation and is not ruled by beliefs. The notation (π) or base (0-10) may change, but it always appears on scientific fenomena and formulas. Its just too complicated...
@@heartsofiron4everdon't I know it. 😂
Psalm 122:5
@@rafaelsilvademedeiros7219who is we?
@@rafaelsilvademedeiros7219
I Am the Logos.
Psalm 122:5
At least philosophy is written in prose
Call me diogenes the way i shat while watching this
Math takes action while philosophy tries to think of over dramatic scenarios that it can worry about.
What's funny about math is that there are big questions about it that inevitably turn philosophical if not in content than in the disposition of the problem.
"Is math a human construct, or is math real? And what if it's both, what does that even mean?"
Trying to answer this inevitably turns into some real philosophical bullshit.
The engineers are lucky, they don't care. They just use math and make cool shit.
1:29 bruh the bg footage
About the allegory of the cave, attitudes of fans towards the Breaking Bad house prove succinctly that people cannot distinguish between a wagon and the shadow of a wagon
Math is the basis for rational argumentation. So in a very real sense math is philosophy.
putting Ayn Rand in the "baddie" category sent me
Is this parody of Exurb1a? 🐢
you had me at titillating
Me watching 9/11 in the background: wait, there's math?
I didn't understood what the video was about
IS THAT FOOTAGE OF 9/11?
Gotta love Shoostakovich in the background, added so much to the chaos 🥹
cool video, i study philosophy myself, if you ever find yourself in Denmark, can you swing by our faculty and tell us how useless we are?
I can't tell if this is satire or not and I love that. XD
Thank christ this isnt real I was gna make a response vid
Bruh i think this video hasn't reached the akbarian metaphysicians
The fish are biting
I don’t get it.
I should make a rebuttal to this video, ive always been talented in math and understood philosophical concepts easier than my peers
Your father didnt own stirner? absolute kindergarten level philosophy
lmao, at first i was thinking wtf, then just laughed lol
All the science was developed from philosophy. Philosophy was actually the origin of science and that means also math. There is also a field called philosophy of mathematics. But I can say that there is also a lot of garbage philosophy out there.
Math existed long before Philosophy, actually Philosophy was created during Greek golden period 5-4 century BC , Math was inventrd when man come on the earth
@@francescosalvato6612 If math as we see it aka more so a understand of base principals then it was much longer then man coming to earth.
Unironically based
All maths is founded on unprovable assumptions. Human reason is so comically limited. The eggheads will never learn.
Maths builds AI, while philosophy saves us from dying to the AI maths built.
Love your schizophrenia
happy wheels
1:33 exavier? I remeber my friend was obsessed with this show. He would take acid and just watch the show. Watching the show sober is un fucking comfortable enough, idk how he watches it while tripping. Shittiest show. Never watch it.
Finally, someone understands.
What has philosophy given us? Nothing. It did not fight our wars, heal our sick or feed our children.
STEM losers: bUt mAtHs Is UsEfUl
Philosopher: What is usefulness?
Philosophers define, and STEM works within those confines of ontology and epistemology
Give me one absolute and true universal definition of what usefulness is by philosophers along with the meaning of all the words i use here
(no resorting to any primal definition or synonyms)
@@_xi4973 there are many different definitions. Just like science is never settled, neither is philosophy.
@@heartsofiron4ever so you're basically conceding that not even philosophers are settled and can definitively define things for scientists or lay people for that matter.
@@_xi4973 If you are looking for universal definitions, try out religion
@@_xi4973 try religion if you want settled answers
5:16 Uncle Ted!
How is philosophy useless? what is your idea of what is useful and what is useless? and how can the fact that a man is racist mean that his works and his occupation/specialty/profession/field etc automatically make what he has said wrong and make his philosophy all wrong or useless or bad? what sparked the fire in you to hate philosophy? and how can 1 murder carried out by a philosopher to a mathematician define all of philosophy, and what does math destroy philosophy at? misogyny and racism is bad but how does it completely define philosophy for you how does one example make everything bad? did Hitler make all Germans bad? you highlight the source saying "ethical decision making" while googling what philosophy is good at, is that not able to help you in shopping like you said was most important? and how you go on your nihilistic rant at the end is just worthless and funny, what led you to believe this, and why defend math if everything is going to be hell on earth in a infinite death loop? this is disappointing and senseless
This is a parody right? Lol
Maybe?
bro wtf🤣
Its funny because its true.
is this satire?
What defines satire in world dominated by irony and post ironic humor ? In a theoretical future where every single human on the planet speaks in a sarcastic tone, could one argue that satire would actually transition into our current conception of truth and facts ?
@@finixmoon127 Get your head out of your ass wanka. I was saying this video is so ridiculous it may as well be satire.