A) “Archimedes will be remembered when Aeschylus is forgotten, because languages die and mathematical ideas do not. ‘Immortality may be a silly word, but probably a mathematician has the best change of whatever it may mean.’”
B) “There is nothing that can be said by mathematical symbols and relations which cannot also be said by words. The converse, however, is false. Much that can be and is said by words cannot successfully be put into equations, because it is nonsense”.
2 makes no fucking sense whatsoever.
1 - do you want to know WHY? mathematical ideas remain the same. we use the same equations people came up with back then - see pythogoras. Whereas languages die when the people who spoke them die out. See every ancient language, pretty much.
mathematicians can understand immortality well, because they know that once their theory is accepted, it gets talked about, written about, discussed in universities - handed down, and unlike spoken language, there's only one language for math. That's the other thing - spoken languages - there are so many - math, there's just the one. doesn't matter where you're from, what your mother tongue, you can converse in math with anyone from anywhere.
hope it helps!
Can you tell me what you think of these:
This are rough copies so I'll be touching them up and rewriting them periodically through the week:
Languages are subject to fade. Ancient tongues diminish as time turns to modernity, however, they are not completely annihilated either. Instead of dying out completely, the ancient language is simply transformed. One word is replaced by a new word though the meaning may remain the same. Aeschylus, as did many of the other classical Greek authors, wrote about themes such as love, hate, vengeance, life, and death. Language and mere opinion on such themes is relative. It is subject to interpretation and to perception. It is not factual. Aeschylus’s comments on the human spirit is left to interpretation, and come a few centuries down the line (and even in his own generation), people may not agree with his ideas.
Mathematical theorems and proves stand the test of time. They may evolve in terms in precision but not in terms of basic tenants and underlying themes and structures. Pythagorean theorems are still used today, milleniaslater. Furthermore, the language around the time of the Pythagoreans has died out eons ago, yet their theorems are still in use in contemporary society. Architects and carpenters are some of the many professions in which Pythagorean theorems are essential.
Mathematical thought and proves can therefore be thought to have a more probable chance of standing time and achieving “immortality”
Statements such as 1 + 1 = 2 stand true for all nations, for all religions, etc,. Words on the other hand, and literature, are subject to change and interpretation depending on the culture and belief system and so forth.
B) Mathematics can be described by language, however—with some few exceptions—language/words cannot be represented by mathematical equations or symbols. A simple mathematical equation such as, a + a = 2a can be represented in words by one solitary stick plus the addition of another solitary stick gives you two sticks. Because mathematics have a tendency to be factual and logical, they can easily be expressed intimately by words, and furthermore they can be described in all different languages. To perform the opposite, proves to be a more difficult task however. It is not as easy to translate a sentence into a mathematical equation or symbols. The reason for this being that words, sentences and language in general are expressive, ambiguous, and emotional and can be interpreted in many different ways. To describe ideas, feelings and emotions through a mathematical equation would be very limited.
B)i believe that any verbal expression can be put into numbers--it is just a matter of finding a system that connects all human beings, or perhaps even all life as we know it.
My logic behind this is
based on the need
for it to be
is a universal concept
The way the statement would be expressed by numbers is by gauging how the statement correlates to the factor that connects us all.
Does it take away from connectivity, or does it add to it, or does it merely shift quantity around?
well, i've been drinking decaf all day
so that's the most i can contribute
to this very fascinating question
on another topic, hello!
my name is xx40, and i'm looking for LJ friends
i found you through your interest, 'twin shadow'
who, i hope, is the music artist
but i also like albert camus
and lady gaga is cool
if my crazy math idea didn't turn you off,
want to be friends?