Do numbers exist in nature or are they human contructs?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Yeah, I answered these before. Those are statements on the physical laws of the universe. Not maths.

CHEESE IS MORE THAN BACON!!1!!!! COMPLY!!1!!

[JimC]

Yeah, I answered these before. Those are statements on the physical laws of the universe. Not maths.

Only in part.

The value of π itself is not a part of the physical universe, at least not in the sense that a different universe could have a different value. It is a property of an abstract geometric shape.

The fact that atoms do have fixed and countable numbers of electrons is saying something about number being fundamental, even if it might be conceivable that a different universe, with some differences in fundamental physical parameters, that the actual numbers per shell may differ.

XC's other examples, although expressed in mathematical terms, I agree are more to do with the physical laws of the universe.

[pErvinalia]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

There are an abundance of near-perfect spheres. Any being wishing to calculate their volume would require the ratio π (or a multiple of it.)

[JimC]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

Neither.

No physical object could ever be a perfect circle; the bottom line would be quantum disturbances at the Planck length level, if nothing else.

However, the circle exists as a logical consequence of the existence of pure numbers, plus the logic of relationships and the nature of space itself. Humans discovered the perfect circle, and the rest of mathematics, as a inevitable and logical consequence of simpler relationships.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

Neither.

No physical object could ever be a perfect circle; the bottom line would be quantum disturbances at the Planck length level, if nothing else.

However, the circle exists as a logical consequence of the existence of pure numbers, plus the logic of relationships and the nature of space itself. Humans discovered the perfect circle, and the rest of mathematics, as a inevitable and logical consequence of simpler relationships.

Actually, π turns up in many places without there being any need for a "perfect circle". The swing of a pendulum, for example. It is also prevalent in the fundamental formulae of both relativity and quantum mechanics.

[pErvinalia]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

There are an abundance of near-perfect spheres. Any being wishing to calculate their volume would require the ratio π (or a multiple of it.)

I said "perfect", not "near-perfect".

[JimC]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

Neither.

No physical object could ever be a perfect circle; the bottom line would be quantum disturbances at the Planck length level, if nothing else.

However, the circle exists as a logical consequence of the existence of pure numbers, plus the logic of relationships and the nature of space itself. Humans discovered the perfect circle, and the rest of mathematics, as a inevitable and logical consequence of simpler relationships.

Actually, π turns up in many places without there being any need for a "perfect circle". The swing of a pendulum, for example. It is also prevalent in the fundamental formulae of both relativity and quantum mechanics.

It does turn up in many other places, but I think its presence as a vital ratio within a perfect circle is its fundamental origin. The unit circle is the basis for trigonometry, which in turn is a vital component of many other mathematical relationships.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The pi one is interesting. Are there perfect circles in nature, or is a circle a human invention?

Neither.

No physical object could ever be a perfect circle; the bottom line would be quantum disturbances at the Planck length level, if nothing else.

However, the circle exists as a logical consequence of the existence of pure numbers, plus the logic of relationships and the nature of space itself. Humans discovered the perfect circle, and the rest of mathematics, as a inevitable and logical consequence of simpler relationships.

Actually, π turns up in many places without there being any need for a "perfect circle". The swing of a pendulum, for example. It is also prevalent in the fundamental formulae of both relativity and quantum mechanics.

It does turn up in many other places, but I think its presence as a vital ratio within a perfect circle is its fundamental origin. The unit circle is the basis for trigonometry, which in turn is a vital component of many other mathematical relationships.

But pendulums exist whether or not a prefect circle does.

[JacksSmirkingRevenge]

Pudendums definitely exist...I've come across a couple.

[pErvinalia]

I've come across all sorts of things in my life...

[Xamonas Chegwé]

I've come across all sorts of things in my life...

Which reminds me, creamπs certainly exist in nature.

[JimC]

XC wrote:

But pendulums exist whether or not a prefect circle does.

First, let me get the humorous dig out of the way...

A prefect circle, eh? Would that be a circle of Etonian bully boys standing around discussing the best way to make a fag do unspeakable things?

Now for the rest. Yes, pendulums exist, and Pi is an essential part of the mathematical patterns that describe and/or govern them. But the existence of Pi as a point on the real number line exists because of a logical relationships that build a perfect circle. It then becomes part of an ever-increasing tree of further mathematical structures, with the perfect circle forming part of the root...

[Xamonas Chegwé]

XC wrote:

But pendulums exist whether or not a prefect circle does.

First, let me get the humorous dig out of the way...

A prefect circle, eh? Would that be a circle of Etonian bully boys standing around discussing the best way to make a fag do unspeakable things?

Now for the rest. Yes, pendulums exist, and Pi is an essential part of the mathematical patterns that describe and/or govern them. But the existence of Pi as a point on the real number line exists because of a logical relationships that build a perfect circle. It then becomes part of an ever-increasing tree of further mathematical structures, with the perfect circle forming part of the root...

The only unspeakable thing I have ever done to a fag is drop its butt into a urinal (you can take that how you wish! )

I think you sidestepped my point. Which was that π arises naturally in nature whether or not perfect circles exist or any sapient creature has dreamed one up.

Einstein's field equation holds whether there is any life around to recognise it or not. As does Coulomb's Law. π (or rather the relationship that π represents) is integral to both.

[JimC]

I agree that π arises naturally in many phenomena, but I would argue that it does so because it is a vital component of circle geometry. All of its "arisings", if you trace the maths back, would derive from the circle in one way or another, which then forms one basal component of the more complex phenomenon. I can't see π being formed by several, independent mechanisms; or if it were, I would suspect deeper connections between the various occurrences.