Robert Win - Natural Sciences

“Science is built with facts just as a house is built with bricks, but a collection of facts cannot be called a science any more than a pile of bricks can be called a house.” (Henri Poincare, 1854-1912)

Here Poincare is saying that Science is everywhere and part of everything and that Science is not just a concept but physical reality. He also is saying that Science is the simplified and organised form of information and facts, and it is this organisaton and simplification which defines science from just information. This sentance was probably used to explain to ordinary people the definition of Science by Poincare, during his lifetime, as science was still conducted with knowledge and control by only a small amount of people at that time (scientists).

This statement, that science is part of and involved in everything, can be demonstrated by the act of throwing a ball at a target. If a child were to throw a ball, there would be no science here through the childs eyes, and the child would likely miss the target, and if the child was asked how it all happend scientifically, he/she would probably be confused by the question. This is because the child is unable to organise and simplify the information he/she receives through sense perseption, and has little to no past experience or understanding, advanced education to understand how the ball was able to be released and travel . The child is unable to organise and structure the information received, because of missing key factors (education, experience, development).

Through the mind of a physician, the ball being thrown at a target would be analysed and all the factors involving the range, speed, direction of a ball would be estimated and pre planned before and during the actual throw, because the physicisan has experience, education, and has physically developed which allows him/her to use his sense perception and uses all these to organise the information (which is the basis of scienece) received to be able to accurately throw the ball and hit the target.

The physcian structures his infomation, the child does not.

William Wong : Natural Sciences

“Science does not tell us how to live." (Leo Tolstoy, 1828-1910)

Leo Tolstoy being a philosopher and a notable novelist believes according to this quote that science and the rules pertaining from it do not answer the question of life. Why we can exist when something clearly cannot come from nothing? However he believes that religion can answer this question.

Another aspect of this quotation is how science does not help humans to live through life happily through various scientific systems, for example modern society or even technology. Humans are not able to peacefully live and interact together in a community. However I disagree, as sociology, the study of the origin, development, organization, and functioning of human society, have created architecture that is constantly improving to address bodies of individuals living as members of a community. Other sciences, such as Psychology has helped understand the human mind and their behavior leading to breakthroughs in attitudes and methods in living life.

AoK 2 - Natural Sciences: Chloe Chan

“Everything you have learned as ‘obvious’ becomes less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.”

The things we have found out and labeled as understandable in the world begins to get harder to understand and more ambiguous the deeper we dig (into explaining the world).

I think this quote is trying to say that in our environment when we were younger we slowly developed our understanding of the world around us and in developing we began to reason logically, and this soon become common sense or in this case ‘obvious’. But in studying science (an understanding of our world), the theories proposed are not definite as there is no real proof of the theories existence as most theories are only a build on logic upon logic.

Taking the existence of atoms and its structure as an example, atoms cannot be seen and it is only assumed that they exist as they explain or fit in with every experiment initiated to test their existence, and every other finding before and after it. Therefore the reasoning used behind the theory is something obvious but the actual existence of this theory is not as obvious as there is no firm proof.

AoK 2: Natural Sciences- Yixia Gu

“The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible.” (Albert Einstein, 1879-1955)

What I interpret Einstein to be saying with this quote is how we humans are awestruck by the fact that we can understand the world. In prehistoric times, the world to us and was an enigma. At present time, we have been provided with the answers to these puzzles and speculations, thanks to the subject of Science- its progression and discoveries which we have used as a tool to come into closer contact with nature and its elements.

The once most ‘incomprehensible’ things about the world and the universe can luckily now be understood. Take the principle of gravity for example: before the apple dropped on Sir Issac Newton’s head, people would have seen things falling to the ground and wondered why they couldn’t jump infinitely high and still wouldn’t realize that gravity is a natural force that prevents things floating away from the surface of the earth. Thus, it was through numerous extrapolations and theories, trials and scientific experimentations that we are in a position to comprehend the world, nevertheless bearing in mind that there is still a copious amount of things scientists can’t come to grips with.

AoK 2: Natural Sciences - Hey Tou Chiu

"Science is built with facts just as a house is built with bricks, but a collection of facts cannot be called a science any more than a pile of bricks can be called a house." (Henri Poincare, 1854-1912)

The quote above basically tries to explain how science cannot be defined as a ‘collection of facts’ in the same way as how a pile of bricks cannot be called a house. Henri Poincare tries to tell us how facts by themselves are not science because they involve much more. Science includes creative thinking, wild imagination, data collection, experiments/tests. However, this is not to say that facts are not needed.

I find myself agreeing with him. I believe that scientists investigate on something new to them or something that they are curious about by forming hypotheses of things. More importantly, they use the existing knowledge and facts that they have to prove or discover more about things unknown to them. Like the ‘black box’ activity, the class did the same thing in order to find out what was inside the ‘box’. The calculation, observations, guesses, and imagination is what allowed us to identify some of the items that were inside the parcel. I think that this whole process is what defines science.

AoK 2 : Natural Sciences – Norbert Poon

"Science does not tell us how to live." (Leo Tolstoy, 1828-1910)

To me, I agree Tolstoy’s quote the most, and has experience to his quote. I think it is saying sciences made our lives exist, it makes our living easier, but it doesn’t tell us the full story of how we can make it as good as our live can be. For example, our science is one of the most integrated working systems in the whole universe. Not even a space shuttle works better. We have all different kinds of hormones, cells, and other chemicals that enable us survive in treacherous conditions like being in the extreme cold. It made our lives easier, as we can adapt to different conditions. We have great technology advancements, that makes our living easier. But we often can not find one best solution to make our living very good. We have to use science to figure out what is the best WE CAN FIND. There must be better solutions then we can find. Science make our living better, but doesn’t tell us the best way to live it.

AoK2 : Natural Sciences - Jason Herrera

"Science does not tell us how to live." (Leo Tolstoy, 1828-1910)

Leo Tolstoy is a famous writer most notable for his writing War and Peace. What he meant by the quote is that Science is not the tool for us to explore and discover ourselves and the enviroment around us.

Tolstoy, as an Othodox Christian believes that faith is the only way that life can be rationalised. This can be shown in one of his works, A Confession. The book talks about the two big questions in life, "What will come of my life?" and "What is the meaning of life?". In the book, Tolstoy attempts to find answers to these questions through science and other areas of knowledge. He stated that only religion holds the key to the answers.

I do not agree to what Tolstoy said in the quotation not only because natural sciences have been a great tool for humans to understand more about life; but also the fact that it helped us to acquire clues to answer the two big questions to life Tolstoy stated.

"What will come of my life?" and "What is the meaning of life?"

AoK2: Natural Sciences -- Lesson 1

Guiding questions:

1. How are perception, reason, and experience used to determine knowledge in the Natural Sciences?


2. What is (a) scientific method?

I hope you enjoyed our 'Black Box' activity. In getting you to collaborate and predict what 'it' was, as well as what 'it' contained, you worked through an inductive process to illustrate the nature of scientific activity (as opposed to the subject/knowledge of science) -- i.e. you observed, thought, induced, explained, inferred, tested your hunches (hypotheses), justified your thoughts, etc. until you arrived at the most plausible account to answer the knowledge issue based on the evidence at hand.

To build on this introduction to AoK Natural Sciences and ready yourself for Lesson 2, you are to bring and post two things before next lesson -- i.e. please...

1. bring TWO advertisements that use the language of science in order to market their products (and be prepared to talk about them); and


2. post your reaction to one of the five quotations below by Tuesday, Feb. 19th -- your post should retell the quotation (i.e. put it in your own words), reflect your understanding of its meaning, and relate the quotation to your life by giving an example that illustrates your interpretation of it.

• "Science does not tell us how to live." (Leo Tolstoy, 1828-1910)
• “As a matter of historical fact, the history of science is, by and large, a history of progress.’’ (Karl Popper, 1902-1994)
• “The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible.” (Albert Einstein, 1879-1955)
• “Everything you have learned as ‘obvious’ becomes less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.” (Buckminster Fuller, 1895-1983)
• “Science is built with facts just as a house is built with bricks, but a collection of facts cannot be called a science any more than a pile of bricks can be called a house.” (Henri Poincare, 1854-1912)
  

AoK 1: Mathematics - Jason Herrera

Baking Bread
In this baking the bread example, Ian Stewart addressed the issue between invention and discovery. He stated that although it is important to distinguish the difference between inventing and discovering, he said that everything requires both of them. He then moved on to saying that "Mathematics has an internal structure of logical deduction that allows it to grow in unexpected ways." This means that new ideas can be generated to cover 'holes' in various theories. Also, he said that the origin of mathematics derived from the real world, and that the abstraction of mathematics came from reality itself. So basically, he is emphasizing the fact that mathematics was "always there"

Lottery Illusion
In this section, Stewart compare the Fibonacci numbers with biology. He stated the fact that the number of petals in a flower corresponds to the Fibonacci numbers, may suggests mathematics is inherent in nature. He also said that our minds tend to look for mathematical patterns, which sprang to theories like Newton's Law of Gravity and quantum physics. He then moved on to saying that "Mathematics is our way of understanding certain features of nature. It is a construct of the human mind, but we are part of nature, made from the same kind of matter, existing in the same kinds of space and time as the rest of the Universe." Which further connotes that mathematics is inherent. Stweart then moves onto a bigger picture, in whether aliens (if they exist) have the same kind of maths as us. But he then summarise that mathemtics is different in every enviroment.

Mathematics Lesson 1

Is mathematics the grand design for the Universe, or merely a figment of the human imagination?

Ian Stewart is trying to get us to think about Mathematics in general, and where it orignated from, is it out there, and do we have to figure it out, or do we make it up as we go along, these axioms together with using language percieption, we come to conclude that using language, language of the maths, many varied people have figured out various things such at pythagoras and i am convinced with this that, pythagoras does work, but we are yet to figure out that there is infact something that it does not work on, it is not infinate.

Lottery Illusion
In this, He is trying to get us to believe that Biology is maths, he thinks that suchs things like petals in a flower are fibonacci numbers such as the first two equal the next one, and from what i know about the mysteriousness about this world and the depth of biology, i agree with him, biology can be maths related such as when you are trying to work out the size of such cells, in MM or CM and you need to relate to maths to change your answer from MM to CM and so on, but such things in biology, such as how a plant grows has nothing to do with maths unless you think about it mathematically, how much water did we add? this effected the growth why? the cells downed etc and I think that we will never truly know everything, thats why theories and myths still live, because noone can truly prove their point because someone always has a better explanation.

Lottery Illusion- Karriena

Lottery Illusion is about how numbers relate to the way we behave/biology. The example given is that a flower has the number of petals which adds up to the Fibonacci numbers. It basically prooves that maths relates to your daily lives and that different numbers can send out different vibrations.
Humans have a tendency to link our daily lives to number patterns by having this tendency it has led to a number of laws on mathematics and the universe. But any patterns we think we see are illusions.
Human minds develope this tendency as we adapt to the real world for survival skills. "Mathematical minds cannot evolve in an unmathematical universe." If maths had nothing to then it would eventually die out.
Everyone has their own way of picking out these patterns and solving equations, "but i doubt that they would have anything like the pythagoras theorem", people adapt to the world in different ways and use maths for different reasons.

Jacqui.W: Herd of Elephants & Baking Bread

Herd of Elephants
Stewart believes that mathematics are simply problems that interlink us humans between the world of maths and the real world. The solutions to maths may answer something that isn't related to maths but something just as real and important but physically unrelated. By using "flow" and "backflow" Stewart gives us the impression that the maths problems are ongoing in a never ending nature's cycle, like tidal waves.
Stewart addresses maths as an abstraction and he strongly believes that human mathematics is so complicated that it's hard to grasp the idea or even write it down on paper. He says that the structure is totally impenetrable therefore being too much info for us to take in and that our behaviour is even related to mathematics being applied to our constituent atoms.
I agree with Ian Stewart and that mathematic problems can be related to something else other than maths, as maths does relate to lots of daily activities we do. However, I disagree with Ian Stewart when he says mathematics can relate to our behaviour as I don't think it can be. I think our behaviour is dependant on our mind and heart to decide, not human mathematics.

Baking Bread
Ian Stewart compares Mathematics to Baking Bread as he mentions that Mathematics starts in the real world, therefore firstly he compares it to an activity in real world and secondly to express his thoughts more easily. Stewart brings attention to whether things in life are a discovery or invention and the different cases in Mathematics between discovery and invention. Stewart says people often oversee the most important things of Mathematics, 'significance, simplicity and elegance'. This could be related to baking as often known, to bake bread, the amounts of ingrediants used must be significant and exact for the perfect texture and taste. The more simple the ingredient is, usually the more delicious and easier the bread turns out to be. Lastly elegance could relate to the feeling and pride gotten from the entire process and of completing and successfully baking bread.
When Ian Stewart says, "Mathematics has an internal structure of logical deduction that allows it to grow in unexpected ways" I think not only does he apply this concept to Mathematics but he's relating this directly to baking bread as well. The difference between Mathematics and baking bread is that for Mathematics, we can generalize theories to make our calculations easier but for baking bread, this is impossible and it must be done the long, hard way and there's no easy way to it because if there was, the bread wouldn't turn out as good anyway.

Baking bread and lottery illusion

The baking bread section suggests that in any area of human activity there is neither "invention nor discovery" but a "complex context-dependent mix of both." Ian Stewart compares the technique of baking bread to mathematics, the ingredients- or in another sense the basic number skills, once you have ditermined and made assumptions , then everything "flows" and is "predetermined'.
He later goes on to argue that math in a universe makes abstact sense. Hence since the abstraction came out of reality , it's no surprise if it applies to reality.
- generalising theories help it to apply to differential equations and suddenly you find applications again, but to dynamics, not to bakery.
The authors use of rhetorical questions "what is medicine?" "where does it live?" "is it invented or discovered?' has a persuasive element, as the reader wonders the posibilities of the answer.

Lottery Illusion
- mathematical patterns are evident in nature and biology, for example the number of petals on a flower are part of the "fibonancii numbers"
- seeking out mathematical patterns is biologically innate in us, as Stewart calims our minds havr a dendency to seet out these.
- this "natural" ability has led to the discovery of Newton's law of gravity and the equations of quantum mechanics in additon theres astrology and the great Pyramid's, which examplify the accuracy and measurements, human kind could achieve.
- Although, what mathematics tells us about choosing lottery nubmers is that any patterns we think we see are illusions.
- He then asks the reader how does our mind develop this tendency for pattern seeking.
- Mathematics is our way of understanding ceartain features of nature.
- It is in our brain to think mathematically
- Only Geometer God can create beins able to come up with geometery.

Alyssa Wootten - Mathematics Lesson 1

Is mathematics the grand design for the universe, or merely a figment of the human imagination?

"Mathematics exists only in the mind of the beholder"

Baking Bread
Ian Stewart speaks persuavingly about maths and other things such as medicine, plumbing, ballet, football, language and cycling and he generally compares them all against one another and he says that they are 'nor invention of discovery, but a complex context-dependent mix of both'.
It works in with the title as well because its something that is found then turned into different kinds of bread.
I would say that I agree with Stewart here, then again I myself think that mathematics is a figment of the human imagination AND ALSO a grand design for a universe as there are different kinds of maths in the world that we need for different sorts of things. Maths can of course lead to new ideas though and Stewart mainly asks us why maths is so important if it was invented by people ourselves, and that you cant go about maths simple minded because there is allot more to it than meets the eye.

William Wong : Is mathematics the grand design for the Universe, or merely a figment of the human imagination?

Nature’s Patterns

Ian Steward in his article believes Mathematics is a “complex context-dependent mix of both” invention and discovery. His example of the ripples on the sand dunes being similar to the wave patterns in liquid crystals illustrates that Mathematics already exists as a design of the universe. However he also believes “mathematics is in the eye of the beholder” meaning that it is also discovered. “We human beings do not experience the Universe raw, but through our senses, and we interpret the results using our minds.” Next steward tells us that invention and discovery can happen at the same time within a particular context by using Edison as an example, “Edison would have felt as if he had invented the idea of electric lighting, but then spent many years trying to discover how to make it a reality.” The title “Nature’s Patterns” suggests that the surrounding environment displays evidence of both invention and discovery.

I agree with steward as his argument claims valid and he has reinforced my beliefs towards this particular subject.

Baking Bread

In this sub-section Stewards explains that Mathematics is derived from the “real world”. From observation of two sheep and two more sheep make four sheep, 2+2=4, we have produced Mathematics that can be applied to “reality”. In addition Steward also claims that “Mathematics has an internal structure of logical deduction that allows it to grow in unexpected ways” which is reinforced by the title as it suggests that an idea in Mathematics can be used to create other ideas.

I have learned much.

William Wong : Emotions

I believe that emotions are both innate, already exists at birth, and natured, developed by the surrounding environment. One way to prove that emotions are innate, is the observation of a new born baby. At birth, a baby can show several different emotions, one could be sadness suggested by crying which shows hunger. During this time, the baby has not been able to develop his/her emotion unless you regard the development of the body in the womb as development of the emotions. Paul Ekman who created a theory on emotions found that even members of an isolated, Stone Age culture could reliably identify the expressions of emotion in photographs of people from cultures with which they were not yet familiar with.

However emotions are also developed, as one grows older and encounters different situations, their body will adapt to it so next time when a similar situation is being experienced, the body will be able to achieve a better outcome by doing whatever is necessary. If we take an identical twin, having minimal variation in genetics, and place them into different environments then we will find that there will be a large difference in their emotions or reactions to events.

Emotions are a function of the sensory and motor areas of the neo-cortex. Emotional reactions also require the use of the limbic system including the hypothalamus, anterior thalamus, cingulate gyrus, and hippocampus. These areas of the body have been proven different in all humans because of variation in the genetic makeup. If what controls our emotions are different, then we can assume the outcome which is the emotion will also be different if they are not developed by the environment into the same.

AOK: Mathematics, Ming Fung

Nature's Pattern:
Ian Stewart is stating that mathematics is imprinted on earth itself, "God was a mathematician". He says that we can see this from the natural trends we see in everyday life, e.g. circular ripples honeycombs are perfectly shaped mathematically. However, he states that these raw material or data we do not experience. But we use our senses to capture these data and interpret rationally with our minds. After that, he discusses that maths, maybe a combination of discovery and invention. I guess Stewart is right, I think many of the things that we invent, would be a mixture of both. And if we do not invent things we cannot possibly discover new things, and vice versa. This maybe why mathematics is incorporated in nature, as we extracted it from nature, and invented new theories and codes like numbers to rationalise what we actually sense.

Herd of Elephants:
Stewart compares mathematics to science. He states that we can put science into practice, but how about maths? Scientists use maths to calculate quantitative chemistry, and also physics. Then he writes that we, human beings may well be behaving according to mathematics, but it would be just be too hard to understand. Mathematics is everywhere, and is linked to everything. This suggests the world is programmed by these numbers, figure, mathematics, everything having direct links and correlation to each other. This reminds me of the matrix, how Neo should be quite a good mathematician because he can comprehend the mathematical matrix and manipulate it.

Robert Win - AoK Mathematics1

Natures Patterns

Here, Stewart explains that in nature, we see similar or the same mathematical shapes and patterns on different things, such as the circular shape of waves on sand dunes similar to the shape of rainbows. Using this, he tries to demonstrate that mathematics is an aspect or even the basis of nature and the universe. Stewart also tries to promote his view, that us, people, both invented and discovered mathematics (as, in his view, mathematics already existed in nature, but we took advantage and developed it further), using the example of how Columbus discovered America while trying to invent a new shipping route to India. This suggests Stewart believes we stumbled upon mathematics while trying to figure a way to interpret and sort things simply.

This particular example does not convince me, however I do believe that mathematics was both discovered and invented as mathematics, in my view, is just a psychological tool we use and a way to technically interpret things, which is what i also learnt from reading the article.

Lottery Illusion
Here, Stewart mentions that mathematics is embedded in biology, conveyed using the example of the number of petals on a flower usually being one of the Fibonacci numbers, which is a number pattern group, therefore implying that mathematics is also embedded in nature. This example is quite convincing to me, and has allowed me to consider the link between nature and mathematics more, however, i cannot say whether i agree or disagree with this statement, as I am not currently sure.

Stewart also discusses whether the mathematical patterns seen in nature are actually by chance, and that they do not represent any significance between maths and nature. Stewarts evidence supporting that humans discovered patterns which are of mathematical significance, and that maths exists within nature, is by implying that early humans noticed patterns, whether or not it was by chance or not, they knew that patterns discovered could be used in future and relied on these patterns. This reliance on patterns and has developed into what we know now as mathematics, as we use patterns and figures to prove or disprove a point.

Stewart also tries to share his view that mathematics is universal by suggesting that aliens would also be able to do mathematics, although not identical to our maths, they would probably also notice similar patterns which they could use to benefit themselves in understanding things


Overall, I have learnt form the article that mathematics is (in my view) a technical way of interpreting things, and a way of knowing and understanding things (as i mentioned above) and is also one tool we use to explain and to simplify things to allow us to understand complex theories.

Chloe Chan - Mathematics lesson 1

Baking bread
In this section Stewart considers whether existence is a discovery or invention. Stewart argues that it is not just invention or discovery that makes existence but a bit of both, as suggested by the title, the mixing of ingredients (invention and discovery) make bread, the existence of something. In the case of discovery the item already exists but was just not known to humans in comparison to invention which suggests taking a discovery and playing with it to make something new. Stewart gives us a guiding question of why maths would be so important if it were invented by people and tells us his answer that maths started in reality and in nature and therefore would apply to reality of life. However maths can lead to new ideas and theories can be made which apply to many different things, baking bread for example started out as a discovery from reality and open paths to new ideas. Stewart’s use of language, of questioning, makes the reader feel involved in the topic which in turn convinces the reader of his view.

In this section I have learnt that maths is one of the most basic yet complex things of life as maths started off naturally yet opened up to never ending branches of unknown ideas.

Lottery Illusion
Here, Stewart argues that mathematics is the source of many other subjects such as biology where the petals found on flowers are Fibonacci numbers, which is due to the cells of flowers. With this, he wonders whether mathematics is innate in nature and within us, where we have the natural tendency to detect and try to correlate things into patterns, which supposedly benefit our survival. Stewart argues that it is due to this natural tendency that we come up with many other theories and formulas. Therefore when watching the lottery we tend to think we see patterns in the lottery numbers and the winners but in actual fact this is just an illusion. He also introduces the idea of aliens having their own type of maths which could be similar or different to ours.

This section has made me realise that it is true that we tend to try and correlate things even if we know something is random. Therefore I think maths really is innate.

Norbert: AoK Mathematics 1: Baking Bread and Lottery Illusion

Baking Bread

Steward is exploring the key similarities of discovery and invention. Discovery to him is research in an area which has a specific answer to a question, and invention is trying to gathering ideas to solve a problem but sometimes it might be lost. To prevent this, we always make assumptions to invent the most we could. 

He also says 2+2=4, no matter what you are counting, from the smallest of ants to the biggest of planets, no matter how abstract it is, and no one should be surprised if it applies to reality. He thinks however that a discovery is useful; we sometimes will find it difficult to apply to our daily life because it only applies to a specific object. One might argue: what is considered as daily life and what is more abstract ideas. It is different to everyone, and it is factual. A scientist might see law of Mathematics a part of everyone’s life, but we might not have thought to create the things we have, mathematics actually plays a bigger part in our lives than we think it does.

What we can learn from these statements is that whilst mathematics is important to everyone, it might be viewed by us that it is more important to someone than to others, and we just have to accept this fact. It is also certainly making a point that mathematics is a discovery; a discovery of specific things in our daily life and not everything. We need to invent ways, and we already have, to help us make assumptions, otherwise we will be stuck.

 

Lottery Illusion

Stewart is claiming the nature has a lot of similarities to mathematics. He used the number of petal a flower usually has to a set of patterns, and from this example he claims mathematics is derived from nature, and we use mathematics to understand nature..  He thinks we also seek these patterns to ‘help us survive’, and that if we didn’t, we would die.

He raised up the question, would another species of living things agree with the mathematics we use? Steward said we might not have the same laws of mathematics because we have different things that surround us. To me, all he has said is very convincing, and rather logical as well. One point that although I agree mathematics helps us understand nature, but I disagree that nature made mathematics exist. In my opinion, mathematics is just a representation (language) of the everything that is physical. This is why I also agree máthema could mean science and mathematics.

What we can see from this section is that nature and mathematics has to be related, that is just a part of our lives. Mathematics let us understand nature, and nature has made us discover Maths, and invent more, and make the world a better place than it already is.