Is Math a Science Essay

Upon arriving at this topic, I had previously been asked a child deal opinionated question, is maths is a information, an fine art, or a philosophy. I thought to myself, well of line all trio. math is for the most part (at to the lowest degree what people see) is a science adding, subtracting, multiplying, dividing, differentiating, integrating, etc. These argon all truly well defined operations which, for the most part, stick real algorithmic resolve methods. The art comes in the proofs. Typically, when processulating a proof youre non accomplishn anywhere to start and so, upright equal in art, practice makes perfect. Also, when writing theorems this move is completely in reverse and the amount of creative thinking required is staggering. Just try draft copy a conclusion from a specialize of fragmented, typically misrelated information (this doesnt even create to be math related).The philosophy comes from concepts of infinity and most of set theory. A lot of e arly math (after the benighted Age) were, for the most part, philosophers. They were fascinated by how something so simple as mathematics could model something so compend and complicated as nature, and yet could itself become as lift as to not be opticalize-able by humans (infinite, dimensions greater than 3, etc.) So it is all three, although r argonly is it simultaneously all three. One of these usually dominates plot of land fixing with math at any hotshot time. But at that place ask been points in business simileship where all three of coincided and it is some of the most mind-boggling and beautiful work youll ever see.But it had got me thinking after taking this course that is math rattling a science, an art, or a philosophy, though for much than thought out reasons. Having an art ventureground and brush asidevas art history front and back, I came to the melodic theme that mathematics and art go hand in hand. (And now energise sexing this, I have a stronger connection as to why math would be considered an art comp ard to a chemical engineer who would be more likely to lean towards a more scientifical view of mathematics).Math and art have kinda a long, historical relationship. The ancient Egyptians and the ancient classics knew or so the golden ration, regarded and an aesthetically pleasing ratio, and incorporated it into the protrude of monuments including the Great Pyramid, the Parthenon, and the Colosseum. There are umteen examples of creative persons who have been exalt by mathematics and have analyze mathematics as a convey of complementing their works. The Greek sculptor Polykleitos prescribed a series of numerical proportions for carving the ideal male nude. Renaissance cougars sullen to mathematics and many, including Piero della Francesca, became accomplished mathematicians themselves.Even look at Galileo Galilei, he wrote that the universe is written in the wrangle of mathematics, and that its characters are trian gles, circles, and different geometric figures. On the other hand, mathematicians have sought to interpret and analyze art through the lens of geometry and rationality. All of this made me achieve that this all had to do with algorithms. Algorithms had to fit into the mathematical relation with art which then got me to the concept of algorithmic art. algorithmic art, also kn consume as algorithm art, is visual art explicitly generated by an algorithm. It is a subset of productive art, and is practically always executed by a computer. If executed by a computer, it is also classed as computer-generated art typically, this is usually categorized as digital art. Fractal art and equation art are two subsets of algorithmic art.For a work of art to be considered algorithmic art, its creation must allow in a process based on an algorithm devised by the artist. Here, an algorithm is simply a detailed recipe for the design and possibly feat of an artwork, which whitethorn include compu ter code, functions, expressions, or other input which eventually determines the form the art will take. This input may be mathematical, computational, or generative in nature. Inasmuch as algorithms tend to be deterministic, meaning that their repeated execution would always result in the production of uniform artworks, some external circumstanceor is usually introduced. This prat either be a random tot up generator of some sort, or an external luggage compartment of data (which, I found, fanny range from enter heartbeats to frame ups of a movie.) Some artists also work with organically based gestural input which is then circumscribed by an algorithm.By this definition, algorithmic art is not to be confused with graphical methods such as generating a fractal out of a fractal program it is of necessity concerned with the human factor (ones own algorithm, and not one that is pre-set in a package). The artist must be concerned with the most entrance expression for their idea , just as a painter would be most concerned with the best practise of colors. By this definition, defaulting to something like a fractal generator (and using it for all or most of your creations) would in centre of attention be letting the computer dictate the form of the final work, and not truly be a creative art. The artists self-made algorithms are an integral part of the authorship, as well as being a medium through which their ideas are conveyed.Though, after delving into the fact that math is and can be very well classified as an art, I do strongly agree that math is a science because I think that math can be considered a science if you look at it from the right perspective. Lets say you have a hypothesis (imagine you are Fermat or Pythagoras). How would you experiment that you were right? You would do an experiment (the proof) and arrive at a conclusion. This is the scientific method, and it does fit how mathematics is done. sometimes it takes a while to do enough experi ments to jump your theory.For one, I still cannot think of mathematics as completely a science the two are fundamentally different in a very important aspect in science we have to look at reality and then give explanations, usually enlisting the aid of mathematics as a coherent language in which to frame our explanations, solely mathematics is done in many other situations beyond science. Pure mathematicians are sometimes proud to claim how useless their discoveries are. In science we experiment. We go into the real world, observe phenomena, go back to the drawing table, and try to explain these phenomena. Then we go back out to the world, see if we can guess a new phenomenon before it happens (when we can do that we usually say that we have discovered a fundamental law of nature), and either smugly rest for the day, or crawl back to the drawing table, slightly disappointed if our hypothesis did not work as we intended.This, in general, is what we call the scientific method. Math ematics is different. Though I do agree that mathematics is becoming an experimental discipline, particularly with the recent entree of powerful calculating machines, it does not rely on these experiments in order to claim Eureka I have discovered a new honor Mathematics requires proof, and its very picky or so what it considers proof to be. For a scientist, ten experiments with consistent results mightiness constitute proof, within experimental error. For a mathematician, a googolplex of successful experiments is not enough proof. Instead, we rely on logic, and this thing we call common sense, fundamental reproducible rules we believe no one will dispute, very basic rules.Mathematics is very often inspired by nature, but it is a purely happy pursuit. It is just a bunch of ideas in our heads, like philosophy. Unlike most of philosophy, there is some glue to it all, some fundamental unity, something we call logic, reason, order. Pure abstract reasoning. Thats why I sometimes like to say that mathematics is applied philosophy. Philosophy under the influence of very specific rules. Then theres the aesthetics of it. The capacity of mathematics to be an art. This is one of my favorite interpretations. The sheer simplistic beauty, the admiration one can feel when one reads an entire proof and studys every aspect of it, when a move truth is found by unsurprising means this is a very personal experience, I think. You unfeignedly have to feel it in the flesh to understand it. That flash of understanding when a complex problem has been solved. That simple marvel of seeing many misrelated ideas congregates under a single roof of logic and order. This is what spurs the most romantic of mathematicians to keep on nerve-wracking to prove that ancient conjecture.Personally, as it turns out, I do not think that anyone will really know what math really is. There may be a myriad of ways of how math can be classified, whether it is an art, a science or a philosoph y. There will always be opinions for and against each(prenominal) concept. But as for me, my heart solely believes that math can be absolutely any of the three concepts above. I feel that maybe there are many ignorant people who do not care enough to be open given(p) to the fact that mathematics may in fact be all three. Who knows, I may have an opinion that can be completely inaccurate, but it wouldnt be an opinion if it could be be wrong.