5×1÷5(1÷5) = ????

>>8288409
Because mathematics itself is not an empirical discipline

>>8288409
>scientifically/logically
you're speaking about the two as if they were synonymous

>>8288481
Becuase they are!

>>8288490
there's a huge intersection, but mathematics only requires that results be proved by deduction. science, while theories can be hypothesized through deduction, are ultimately beholden to observation

File: 1471560035813.jpg (11KB, 364x365px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 364x365px

>field based on deduction and numerical logic
>what if we put experiments in it

Empiricism is a matter of observing the real world.

Many concepts in maths are supported by axioms.

It has nothing to do with maths not being logical.

>>8290295
>Many concepts in maths are supported by axioms.
What is the evidence these axioms exist? How do we know that you aren't simply making up stuff to justify fallacies?

>>8290307
I suggest you look up what and axiom is.

>>8290310
I already know what an axiom. It's long-""""proven"""" dogma that everybody must not question at all because they're labelled axioms.

>>8288409
In what sense do you mean empiricism?

>>8290314
You do not understand what an axiom is.

>>8290320
>You do not understand what an axiom is.
You do not understand what logic is.

File: 8920 - maths science touhou.jpg (199KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 800x800px

has science gone 2far

>>8288409
5*1/5(1/5)
(5*1/5)*(1*1/5)/(5*1/5)
1*0,2/1
0,2

>>8290560
wrong

>>8288409
What does your questions have to do with you being a lazy fuck and not putting any parenthesis in that title so idiots try to answer it and get it "wrong"?!

>that's not very science

That's not very English

>>8290534
No, the first guy was right. If you think empiricism and math are in any way related, you need to do some google searches before you make an asshole of yourself on a forum no one posts on..

>>8288409
empiricism is the road to applicability. can't have that in math now can we.

>>8290925
>>>/b/

>>8288409
Math isn't science and never has been..

>>8288409
Logic is independent of observation and science is dependent on observation. By definition empiricism requires observation. So math is independent of empiricism. Why conflate the ideas of science and logic?

File: イメジ.jpg (179KB, 1697x956px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1697x956px

is it right for scientists to play with time?

>>8288409
Math is just a tool

If it was empirical a lot of claims would eventually end up being proven wrong

Its possible to prove things to be absolutely true or false in mathematics so empiricism is pretty much useless

1/5