News Feed

Is "1+1 = 2" an agreement or an objective reality ?

EnquirePosted by Luis Daniel Maldonado Fonken 2017-02-20 08:54:46

ENQUIRE: Is a project by the LDMF Foundation. How questions can change our perception ?

Is "1+1 = 2" an agreement or an objective reality ?

In relation to the history of math, an operator is in principle an agreement.

Can an agreement become a cultural deficiency for the scientific community? Back to the history of math: the creation of alternative math systems proof the fact that other forms of math has been necessary for the purpose of demonstrating or describing a theory or a natural phenomena.

Why a scientist would act in relation to an agreement as it would be an objective reality?

In how many cases decisions have been made based on scientist taking agreements as for objective realities?

Which is the role emotional intelligence and perception play in scientific research and in the scientific community culture ?

For instance: in order to understand what "1+1=2" is, we need to define 1, 2 and "+". Through a direct perception of one apple, two apples, we can agree on the meaning of the "+" operator.

Math as a language used for description may serve us well. But the definition of 1 may vary from an apple, to the definition of individuality, to sub atomic particles, to the conclusions of Schrödinger's cat experiment.

What means 1 ? The question is about what is being quantified and where the perception may fail (or if one has the technology necessary to perceive with accuracy).

Why could fail ? here is where i think the relationship between emotional intelligence and perception plays a meaningful role when the study of a perceivable reality/object/phenomena.

For example, if we consider observation of mechanical aspect of a "love relationship" we could agree that there are 2 individuals in a relationship. But if we intent to describe the different states of emotions, abilities of communication and collaboration at a given time in the relationships, according to the influence the menstrual cycle has in women, and its impact in those dynamics, we may agree there are 3 up to 9 "individuals" with given traits interacting in pairs. The perception of the number 2 failed, at the definition of the number 1.

Another example: Wave-Particle Duality. Albert Einstein. " "It seems as though we must use sometimes the one theory and sometimes the other, while at times we may use either. We are faced with a new kind of difficulty. We have two contradictory pictures of reality; separately neither of them fully explains the phenomena of light, but together they do."

Or for example:

How often medicine has dangerous side effects for women, for the simple reason that trials have not been done on women, with the good intention to protect them. A very important details has been misperceived with this decision made by "the scientific community" in general. DNA in men and women is different and is also present in every cell. (REF: TED Talk: )

If i reformulate my question: When is "1+1 = 2" an agreement or an objective reality ?

How the scientific community may agree on one perception, and have a blind spot in the other one, or other ones. When math (system) as a language is not able to describe all that is there or is perceivable or that has been perceived ?

think my question is not only about math as a language able to describe phenomena or theory.

For the purpose of comparison, indeed, 12=12 which would be the same as to say 1=1

In the example i described above, regarding gender and medicine, the perception agreement was that because both male and female have human DNA ( 1=1 ) the medicine will be tested only in men ( 2=1). Which created an error ( 2<>1) 2=1+1 .

In this cases, as i suggested, the object of observation assigned to "1" creates the final result.

I think numbers in this case, taken as for a language, mean something and are used in order to communicate, perception, that a culture or community will carry.

In that case the scientific community carry 2=1 for long time with several direct and collateral damage.

i suggest you consider just for the purpose of this question numbers as symbols, as words that content meaning, a meaning which vary according to context.

lets suggest that the context for each case of the examples of this question, means to quantify = define meaning, a different or unique type/class of object.

In this case we have:

numbers [ 1 = 1 always ]

numeric systems, numbers [ reality vary according to numeric system ]

DNA, species, male and female [ reality = 2 but perceived it as 1]

Wave, particle [ reality = 2,1 but perceived it as 1]

Nr of cats, Schoredinger [ "reality" = 2 but perceived it as 1]

A 3D image with tow different shadows (Image JPG) [ reality = 2+ but we refer to the object as 1]

3,4 and up to 9 phases of communication and emotional ability to interaction that are expressed in a woman, according to case, as influence of the menstrual hormonal changes, plus the male love partner [ reality = 2 ,3,5,9 but perceived as 2]

As you see, if you review the question and example, you will notice i intent to refer to the numbers and math as a language, not only for its calculating function, but for its power of communication, defining perception, and legacy.

In the case of the medicine example, DNA, scientist developed trials with males only. The legacy, later taken by the scientific community as a shared perception and eventually a cultural deficiency, was to think that DNA in all humans is the same or in other words to dont consider that because female DNA is not the same, the trials on male wouldnt be representative of the effects of the medicines in women: they took the number 1: to represent the totality of the human individual, while they had to give the value of two.

In few words it is not the calculation ability of math, but what we count, and how we assign a value (quantification) to the objects of perception, through counting. This is the first step. The second step for the purpose of this example is calculation, use of operators. First we assign to each number something to be calculated. If perception (of what is being calculated and how many of those are assigned to each number: 1=1, 2=1, 3=1, 9=2, and so on for the example) fails, there will be legacy. Then the calculation, description or demonstration made by math will have a relative value.

Maybe with this explanation i would inspire more our dialogue.

  • Comments(0)//