Mathematics is NOT a Universal Language

[Eric W]

It is true that the math "language" must be learned. Two people must agree on what a plus sign is. And if you look at math history, that took a lot of doing. And of course eventually agree on the other rules of the language, order of operations, etc. etc. But once those rules are agreed upon, when the language is spoken correctly, both sides will always get the same answer.

But for a spoken language, that's not always the case. There is cultural bias, idioms, past history, all encompassed within the language. It's possible to create a statement that entirely follows the rules of the language, which is incomprehensible to another speaker. As a very minor example, in English we'd say "I'm full" when we're done eating. In Spanish, the exact translation of that would be "Estoy lleno." Which would make no sense to a native Spanish speaker. They would say "Estoy satisfecho" (I'm satisfied) instead.

So yes, both parties (speaker and listener) must still learn the language of mathematics, but when properly "spoken", it is more easily understood than other languages. You could say "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" to an alien, but he'd probably just wonder what a bird or a bush is. But he could comprehend 2 > 1.

That's my 2 cents.

 

[mole999]

But he could comprehend 2 > 1.

really ? if the constants have not been agreed the very words that produce them could lead to a misunderstanding.

Then again to discover why one is better than two begs a question

 

[Eric W]

really ? if the constants have not been agreed the very words that produce them could lead to a misunderstanding.

I was very pointed in saying that the language of math must be learned, which would include what the constants are. I can imagine trying to communicate with an alien across light years with only a binary code, and eventually build up a math language. But would you want to teach him the verb "walk" when he may not even have legs? Yet every Earth language has that verb. If you were to receive a signal from outer space, how would you try to communicate?

 

[Jonmo1]

It is true that the math "language" must be learned. Two people must agree on what a plus sign is. And if you look at math history, that took a lot of doing. And of course eventually agree on the other rules of the language, order of operations, etc. etc. But once those rules are agreed upon, when the language is spoken correctly, both sides will always get the same answer.

That is True of ANY language

But for a spoken language, that's not always the case. There is cultural bias, idioms, past history, all encompassed within the language. It's possible to create a statement that entirely follows the rules of the language, which is incomprehensible to another speaker. As a very minor example, in English we'd say "I'm full" when we're done eating. In Spanish, the exact translation of that would be "Estoy lleno." Which would make no sense to a native Spanish speaker. They would say "Estoy satisfecho" (I'm satisfied) instead.

I don't see how that is relevant to this discussion.
You're posting an example of two people speaking two different languages.
I'm talking about two people speaking the same language.. Math.
But anyway, if your Translator truly understood Both the English and Spanish languages, then the meaning would be correctly expressed to/from either party.

So yes, both parties (speaker and listener) must still learn the language of mathematics, but when properly "spoken", it is more easily understood than other languages. You could say "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" to an alien, but he'd probably just wonder what a bird or a bush is. But he could comprehend 2 > 1.

Again, This is true of ANY language.

If to be called Universal it means that both speaker and listener must abide by the same rules, symbols and syntax, then Math is no more Universal than Any other language.

 

[Joe4]

So from this I conclude that people of higher education (who clearly speak math) disagree on the rules of math.
Or at least they don't apply the rules in the same way.
Therefore it's NOT universal.

Bad programming. I have seen a lot of it. One would like to think people with "higher education" would know better, but laziness abounds!
FWIW, I have also seen plenty of people with higher education butcher the English language (when it is their native tongue).

If to be called Universal it means that both speaker and listener must abide by the same rules, symbols and syntax, then Math is no more Universal than Any other language.

If you look at those links I provided on the previous page, one plainly states how it is universal. It is the concept, not the language or symbols one chooses. If you have ten of something and add another ten, you will have twenty. Regardless of what language or symbols you use, the actual number of objects is not different because of the language or symbols used. You would never have 19 objects because you used a different language or symbols.

 

[Eric W]

Maybe it's just the word "Universal" that's the problem. I agree, a language of whatever type must be learned by both sides to be useful. And mathematics is not "spoken" universally by everyone, hence the difference of opinion about what 2+2*2+2 is.

Maybe a better word would be elementary, or "context-free" language. Mathematics is a self-contained subset of the methods we use to communicate. (Let's not quibble about self-contained and Godel right now.) 1 + 1 means the same thing in Japan or New Orleans. 1 pagoda + 1 pagoda does not mean the same as 1 jazz club + 1 jazz club. But if you strip out history, cultural bias, context, idioms, etc. etc. you're left with . . . math?

 

[DocAElstein]

Cross Posted here:
http://www.mrexcel.com/forum/lounge-v-2-0/911516-mathematics-not-universal-language.html
Mathematics is NOT a Universal Language - Page 2

I say that Mathematics is no more universal than any other language............ like English, Spanish, French, and German etc.

The fact that different people get different answers is because they are not following the rules. Of course it needs to be learned. We are not born with the full knowledge of any method of communication, or have any in-born knowledge of "rules"........ A mathematician in Germany who speaks no English could communicate in "mathematics" to an English speaking mathematician who knows no German. That is how it is universal.

Just a small German / English contribution...

Sometime it can help get over language differences ( non universalability ) to go the extra mile, adding extra, not always necessary steps. But that can irritate those that do not need the extra Info. Parenthesis can both have a similar Mathematical significance as well as generally being interpreted as indicating an order.. Helps to bridge the gap, maybe make it a “ bit more Universal “
So, maybe write always:

2 + _( 2 * 2 )_ + 2​

As Jonmo1 reported half the people thought that anyway, most of the rest would get the meaning of the Parenthesis.
___o00o__`(_)`___o00o___

2 + __( 2 * 2 )__ + 2


Happy New Year​

So what I am saying, if you have the time, go the extra mile to explain it a bit clearer. There are no easy way to bring together differences in Languages and cultural ways of thinking built up over the years.... But it can help.. To Work together to help make it ( more ) universal

Alan

 

[shg]

The fact that two systems evaluate an expression differently doesn't mean that the math is not universal; it means that the systems have not agreed on the meaning or precedence of symbols.

The meaning of symbols changes depending on the conversation, and operator precedence is just a convenience for making written expressions more compact, to avoid a proliferation of parens -- but requires prior agreement. Witness the tempest in a teapot about Excel's evaluation of -2^2.

NASA thought it was universal enough to put some basics on the Voyager spacecraft in 1977: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/images/image003.gif

 

[DocAElstein]

...
Sometime it can help get over language differences ( non universalability ) to go the extra mile, adding extra, not always necessary steps. But that can irritate those that do not need the extra Info. .......

....... and operator precedence is just a convenience for making written expressions more compact, to avoid a proliferation of parens -- but requires prior agreement. .....

Sorry Somehow I thought you would reply just after me...( I assume you mean Parenthesis by parens - I could not find a reference to that abbreviation – you introducing a new language ? ). Happy New Year shg. ?

 

[shg]

Sorry about what?