Radio Inspire

How To Learn Sign Language

Is Math the Language of the Universe?

Hey Crazies. There this thing that mathematicians and physicists
like to say: Math is the language of the universe. You’ve probably heard it so many times that
you’ve just accepted it as truth. But rule #8 here at the Science Asylum is
Question Everything? Is math really the language of the universe? Answering this question is going to take some
time and we need to be careful, so let’s start with a simpler question: Is math even a language? What is a language, anyway? That’s two questions, but I’ll see what
I can do. We need to know what a language is before
we can decide if math is one. A Language is a complex system of words and
symbols, either spoken or written, used by a particular community as a means of communication. OK, so it makes sense why something like English,
German, Arabic, or even iglatin pay would be languages. But what about math? Is math a complex system of words and symbols? Yes! Either spoken or written? Mostly written, but yes! Is it used by a particular community? Definitely, yes! As a means of communication? Well… maybe? The purpose of math isn’t just to communicate
ideas to each other. Math is used as a tool to make predictions
about the actual world. Of course, this requires us to also ask: Is the sole purpose of a language to communicate? I would say no… and I think most of you
would agree with me. Language can also be used a tool. In the right hands, language can be used to
inspire, to lightening the mood, or to strengthen someone’s resolve. In the wrong hands, it can be used to hurt
someone, to destroy their reputation, instill fear, or even to control others. I don’t think the fact that math is used
as a tool is a disqualifier. The definition of a language doesn’t even
require that communication be the sole purpose. It said “as a means of” not “for the
purpose of” I’m still not entirely convinced though. We need another test. Something else we know about languages is
that you can translate between them, so, if we can translate between math and a
language like English, then we might have a decent argument. Oh! You want start an argument? Well, let me tell you… No, not that kind of argument. When I say “Argument,” I don’t mean
one of those fights over politics or whatever. An argument is more of a set of reasons or
ideas in support of a conclusion in an effort to persuade others to the same
conclusion. It’s a point made by a logical individual
in a calm discussion. People are rarely thinking logically in political
conversations. Anyway, let’s give translation a try. When you translate from any language to another,
some meanings can get lost, but as long as most ideas can translate, I
think we’re good. We said earlier that languages are made of
words and symbols and that math has plenty of symbols. The most recognizable symbol is probably this
one: the equal sign. The word “equal” is more of a name than
a meaning though. A direct translation for the equal sign would
be “is the same as” which is a phrase rather than a word, but
that’s OK. Translations don’t have to be a one-word-to-one-word
correspondence. This English 8-word sentence is 6 words in
Polish, but 10 words in Albanian. Math is just much more concise. It takes way fewer symbols to contain a meaning. Except you don’t find a mathematics option
in Google Translate So what gives? Is it a language or not? Hmm, I don’t think we can judge by Google
Translate. It only has 103 languages
and there are over 6900 spoken languages currently in use,
not to mention all the dead languages. My point is that Google Translate is far from
complete, so let’s try some translations on our own. Math uses the Latin letters and the Greek
letters both upper case and lower case
and a whole collection of other unique symbols; which is probably why people are so afraid
of it. All of those symbols have at least one meaning,
but many have multiple meanings that we have to understand by context. For example, an upper case “B” could be
the bulk elastic constant, which represents how rigid something is in
response to pressure changes. Like air in response to a sound wave passing
through it. But an upper case “B” could also be the
strength of a magnetic field the kind of thing you might imagine is around
a bar magnet. This is pretty typical of languages though. Take the English word “Duck,” for example. It could refer to a type of bird
or the action of suddenly lowering your head. Words with multiple meanings are so common
there’s a word to describe them: Homonym, so multiple meanings doesn’t disqualify
math as a language either. Let’s try to translate a whole sentence. Say you’ve got a simple mathematical sentence
like this. It makes use of 6 symbols: Delta, s, Equals,
f, i, and minus. We’ve already seen Equals means “is the
same as.” Delta means “change in” and S means “position”
or “where something is.” The “f” and “i” are only subscripts. They just describe the symbol they’re attached
to, so they’re more like adjectives than nouns. “f” stands for “final” or “at the
end,” “i” stands for “initial” or “at
the beginning,” and minus means “the difference between.” So this mathematical sentence reads: “The
change in where something is is the same as the difference between where that something
is at the end and where that something is at the beginning.” Seems like a pretty logical statement. You can do this with other mathematical sentences
too. Newton’s 2nd Law, Ohm’s Law, even Einstein’s
Equation. Like any other translation though, you lose
some meaning. Mathematical sentences say a lot more than
their English translation. You’re also going to have a really hard
time translating the other way. This English sentence has no translation in
Math. Although, I’m willing to hear arguments
in favor of this one. Translations, Grammar, Adjectives, and Nouns. Sounds a lot like a language to me. And, as a scientist, I use it to communicate
with people all the time. So is math a language? I would argue “yes”
and, just like any other language, it’s governed by a set of rules. Those rules are just a lot more absolute than
a typical language and they’re built from the ground up. This gives math some extra power if you know
how to use it, which brings us back to our original question: Is math really the language of the universe? OK, this one is a little trickier. If math really is the language of the universe,
then anything we calculate should have meaning, which seems to be true of counting. We take something like this and call it “one.”
and something like this and call it “two.” We can put them together and call that “three.” We can put three of those threes together
and call it “nine” These seem like pretty solid rules
and they seem to apply to the universe. But we’re going to learn a lot more if we
try to disprove it. We need to find a number that doesn’t have
any meaning. Hmm, there are tons of calculations I could
just make up, but no one would ever expect those to have
meaning anyway. Maybe something people would expect to have
meaning. What about density? Oh! That’s brilliant! I’m so glad you’re a clone of me. Density measures the “compactness” of
a substance. An easy way to calculate it is take the mass
and divide by the volume and this tells you something about the spacing
between the molecules. It makes sense for things like ice or rubber
or helium gas or air Wait a minute! Density measures the “compactness” of
a substance. Air is a mixture of a bunch of different things. Mostly Nitrogen and Oxygen gas, but still a
mixture. It’s a pretty uniform mixture though, so
I could understand arguments for calling that mixture one
substance. But what about this? Can’t I just measure mass on scale
and the volume using a beaker and then divide the two numbers? I suppose you could, but that number wouldn’t
really say anything. It’s what we’d call an average density,
which might make sense for a uniform mixture like air. But not for this rubber ducky. It’s made of two substances: rubber and
air. and they’re definitely not uniform throughout
the ducky. So, while it might be a useful short-cut in
a calculation somewhere, it doesn’t actually tell you anything about
the compactness of the ducky. It’s a number that only exists on paper. It has no physical meaning
and that’s another reason it can’t be used to explain why things float,
commenters!! Anyway, all average values sit in this grey
area. Sometimes they have meaning and sometimes
they don’t. Meaning is what we’re looking for in science. We’re trying to answer deep philosophical
questions about our existence like: Where did we come from? Why are we here? Science is about meaning. It’s about language. Plus there are plenty of statements that have
meaning, but don’t have a translation into math. Math alone will never be enough. No number will ever answer those deep philosophical
questions. Not even 42! Math is not the language of the universe. Even if we wanted to personify the universe
and say it’s trying to communicate with a language,
which I would advise against, Math is only a small part of our best translation
of it. So, what do you think? Does the universe work using math? Or is it something we made up? I’d like to know in the comments. Thanks for liking and sharing this video… Don’t forget to subscribe if you’d like to keep up with us. And until next time, remember, it’s OK to
be a little crazy. In the last video, we learned about the lives
of stars. Comment response time! Benbedra mentioned you can learn a lot more
from star light than just color and age. Yes, using optics, we can also learn what
the star is made of and how fast it’s moving toward or away
from us. You can also get distance sometimes,
but that’s a topic for another video. Ira Sanborn told his kids the light coming
from the Sun peaks in green! It’s pretty weird, but it’s true. In fact, it’s very common for stars. If you take all the peak wavelengths from
all the stars in the universe, you get a greenish color. It just doesn’t look green because it’s
emitting the other colors too. When our eyes receive light of all colors,
it sends that information to the brain, but that just looks like a jumbled mess,
so your brain turns it all white to create contrast in your field-of-view. Yeah, white light is an illusion. Also a topic for another video. Miss Physics wished she had studied more
astrophysics in her undergrad. The downside to university programs
is really all the non-majors courses you have to take to get a degree. Undergrad took me 5 years and I still didn’t get
to take all the undegrad physics courses I should have. I guess we’ll just have to learn things
on our own. It’s more fun that way anyway. School’s intense. Graeme Wilson asked if black holes were frozen
at absolute zero and the answer is “no.” For a while, we had special laws for black
holes, but eventually realized they were just the
laws of thermodynamics. Black holes have to obey the laws of thermodynamics
just like anything else. Even though that might result in a few paradoxes. Future video. I agree completely with Jim Groth that how
we know what we know is very important. Getting to see the process can make science
feel more doable to non-scientists. And learning the history behind it can help us
understand the obstacles we ran into along the way, which is why my advanced eBook is written
from a historical perspective. Because even people who go into physics like
me need that history. Keadin Mode Star Trek is the best the
reason to talk about Wolf 359! A close second would be that it’s so low-mass,
it almost isn’t a star. Future video. OK, one more thing before I go:
YouTube has started these end-card annotations that work on mobile,
but there’s a 20 second limit, which means I can’t use them. These comment responses are a few minutes
long. I’m considering separating comment-responses
into their own video, kind of like how Idea Channel does it,
but I didn’t want to do that without talking to you first. Pros: It lets me use the mobile annotations
and it makes the videos a little more sharable. Con: It separates the conversation, which
I’m a really hesitant about. Let me know you thoughts or feelings about
this in the comments. OK crazies, thanks for watching
and I’ll see you next time.

100 Replies to “Is Math the Language of the Universe?”

  • I guess some aliens would recognise most of our math as something they already know, something familiar, not symbol by symbol, but it's like "patterns" of our math is very close to their math. There is such a thing as "Kolmogorov complexity", aliens would easily understand which of our math "knowledge cluster" is equal to the their by this metric.

  • "operator" is the essence of math. material, geometry, number (non-dimensional properties etc..) is just information. operator makes the meaningful number. Governing equations and boundary conditions etc. So, numerically and physically approach are important equivalently.

  • Heh heh. Love the Douglas Adams reference.

    We are made of the same stuff and part of, if not actually THE "universe" itself.. so when we do math; that is the universe doing math but the universe at large,.. if it had a central processing node of which to understand itself,.. somewhere in the universe; it would LIKELY not need math bcz it would be capable of understanding the entire structure as one thing.

    We need math as the microscope of the mind. We must break down reality to it's smallest perceivable parts bcz the whole is far too complex a structure for feeble brains to understand. Additionally, the universe's structure is in a constant state of flux and therefor our measurement and or verbalization would also need to change.

    Then there is the problem that particles are a matter of perspective and really always part of a wave. heh heh

    Math = measurement tool and a language but a universal language.

    I don't speak math but rather think in terms of visualizations that are sometimes ineffable. Hence the universe is likely ineffable also.

  • math and language are two different things. what most of us refer to as maths language, with the arabic numerals and greek/latin letters, is a dsl (domain specific language) for math. math can also be done in c. different symbols and syntax, same concepts.

  • The natural language of the phenomenal universe is in based in integer. We can see that energy is spontaneously organized into whole number integer units as it interacts with matter and mediums (See the harmonic series). This includes light waves and Electro magnetic waves and indeed the reason for the naming of quantum physics as such.

    Regardless of what invented names we apply to these whole number integers, Their spontaneous Emergence As an apparently inevitable consequence of energy moving through medium Lends credence to the concept Of math as the language of the universe, So to speak.

    To be clear this is based on an interpretation of integer as the fundamental building block of a mathematical logic.

  • man has come up with a system to describe measure and calculate things. we call it math.
    Another system may do the same but go about it in a different way.
    So a better question would be does the universe have or use a language and of course the answer is no.

  • The example you gave with density seems a bit deceptive as you could argue that the "ducky" could be described with multiple math equations rather than one. There also is the issue that we have discovered more and more of what use to be "formal" Math having applications in the Physical world as we progress in science.

  • Presuming we are living in a simulation, I would like to meet the intelligence that wrote the code.

  • Math is a description of the way the universe interacts, it's not prescriptive. At least that's my admittedly naive opinion.

  • I like to think that there's some better language of the universe, which can be translated with math but not all of it

  • At 1:31, the face at instill fear is also the face of the cover😂😂 actually I using that as a memes, hope you don’t mind. If you do, pls remind me for that.

  • However it is best way we have to describe the universe and its properties. It is still an evolving language like the universe itself. Calculating overall density of an object help us predict whether it will float or sink. The number maybe is still useful in describing physical phenomena, perhaps our way of defining things is not that accurate or covers all contexts.

  • The lonely sea snail cruises the largely barren mid-ocean floor tasting everything it comes across to see whether to eat it, mate with it, run from it, or ignore it and, of these four choices, efficiently deciding what to studiously ignore is the only practical use for its pathetic brain. Language, logic, and mathematics are all about knowing what to ignore, as is having a sense of humor.

  • The math is a toll made by humans to explain the universe, the math explains the universe but the universe dosen't use math.

  • Math is a language to interpret the universe, the fact lot of thing can be describe by math does not mean math is it's language under it… any though ?

  • These videos are the best. But the mad high pitch fast comical present is unbearable. I hate it.
    SLOW DOWN – half the speed

  • Density has a meaning. It means tihe average compactness of thesubstances in an object.

  • All of which math has done it even is a basis for some languages none of which is accomplished without some form of symbolization used for communication.Though it may not be clear if we are inventing math or it already existed, it most definitely is a tool we use to communicate.

  • 04:46 – oh my god, why wasn’t It shown in my first grade, if math was taught as a language – that would make so much more sense

  • (Disclaimer: officially, 42 was chosen by Adams because he didn't want anything special.) 42 was a concise answer chosen by a computer, so it is reasonable to assume it is binary, which looks like this: 101010. The question is about life, the universe, and all the rest, three things so maybe there are actually three questions and three answers: 10, 10 and 10. 10 can be both seen as "two" or as "one and zero", which IMHO would be a brilliant concise representation of the word "both". Remember Deep Thought said the mice wouldn't like the answer? If you ask an either-or question, "both" sure isn't a very satisfying answer. But what are the questions? Now we're getting a bit philosophical, but I'd say the typical questions about your life (rather than life in general which is another matter) is what should I/we do, i.e. a decision. Deep Thoughts answer to that might then be pluralism. The typical question about the universe is what is it like. Deep Thoughts answer to that might be something akin to the Manyverse Interpretation, everything that can exist does exist in some sense. And the rest? That's a tough one but I'd say it refers to the generalization of the first two: the really tough questions that still cause debate after one million years do not have a single answer, they have multiple answers that are equally valid.

  • Mathematics is often considered a formal language, akin to mathematical logic. With formal languages, it's improper to ascribe natural-language elements like nouns, verbs, etc. to formal languages as formal languages are strictly meaningless.

    There are many ways to interpret this, but consider a model-theoretic view: formal languages are sentences which can be manipulated according to some set of rules to preserve their meaning i.e. their truth-tables. By themselves, they mean nothing. They're intended to model the way sentences in natural-languages preserve truth (hence model-theory). If mathematics is to be a (albeit pretty complicated) formal language (or maybe a set or group of formal languages, viz. axiom relativity), then the meanings of the terms become null, nullifying those arguments which appeal to this property (we often offer a blueprint in translating back formally by stating something to the effect of "Let <phi> be <something>", etc." where "something" is in the metalanguage, and "phi" is a metavariable in the object language).

    What's curious is that the ontological status of mathematics is actually completely underdetermined. There's an infinite number of incommensurate ways to represent basic mathematical entities in set theory alone (see Benacerraf's identification problem for more), let alone the (what you might call the "mathematical constants" as it were, or) operations can be expressed in second or first-order predicate logic (with a bit of redundancy), or as a series of merelogical relations. There really isn't a way to tell, and this question is far from having the ghost of a consensus about it, but I am actually quite partial to a natural-language interpretation of mathematics, kinda like what you did. Only this kind of question about some natural-language entity would kick up as much fuss as it has. (Incidentally, this aporoximates the sort of appeal fictionalists, of all people, tend to make in their arguments).

  • Scientists want meaning, you say, but three trees are not three hula hoops. Math is a language without meaning, in that it tries to be universally applicable. Even physicsmath isn't as mathy as mathmath. Math's "equals" sign has a sort of symmetry that "tree" and "hula hoop" don't. It equates to (or is) the word "is", as you point out, whereas the words tree and hula hoop are timeless conceptions, posited by human artifice. What is, actually is, on the other hand. The universe is. It is described by math. Ironically, once a tree is, or a hula hoop is, it is subject to time, and thus in the process of becoming something else. Math is tricky that way, as it has meaning, like any language which is used to represent realities, but it also excludes what it means. In "sum", math is language, but the universe is not language, but math is the universe.

  • It’s a language that we set symbols that describe something in nature. It isn’t more fundamental than the universe itself, it just describes it

  • Math is conceived by humans and we use it in order to describe natural phenomena. We humans are just as much apart of nature as anything else though.

  • My opinion: math is the language of the universe.
    Reason: the universe just exists as-is as a set of super tiny particles in (probably) a vacuum, subject to a set of physical laws. This set does not care about phylosophical questions, nor does it care about economics, engineering, psychology, baking bread, knitting christmas sweaters, life and whatnot. It's humans that (albeit also merely a result of the chain reaction of particles due to the physical laws they're subject to – a.k.a. determinism) make the mistake of thinking concepts like randomness (and thusly also the concepts of having control over their own minds, thoughts, ideas, feelings, emotions, …) reflect reality

  • I agree with your conclusion but not one of your premises.

    I'm not convinced that a language of the universe needs to have every sentence of it make sense, or even convey meaning. I would argue that 'the' language of the universe (Which presupposes there can only be one but i digress) would simply need to be capable of describing it. As far as I can tell, math is capable of describing it, and if it isn't then historically we develop it until it does (See newton and calculus for physics)

    Moreover i disagree with your example about density. Saying "The density of the duck is about its mass divided by the volume of water it displaces" is more akin to asking someone "Where did everyone go?" and they say "Everyone went over there" and pointing in a general direction. Meaning is conveyed and it gives you an idea of what you're dealing with. It's not like you'll end up with the density of a neutron star of you don't account for the duck's non-homogeneous structure, rather an approximation given the data and language you used of the duck's density. Just as when someone points and says "Everyone went over there" it's not true that everyone proceeded in that exact direction, the statement lacks specificity, that doesn't mean the language used is incapable or insufficient.

    The duck could be broken into multiple pieces and then a complicated piece-wise relation could be used to describe exactly how the duck's density varies with distance from its center of mass. Math can and does describe this phenomenon as precisely as we can measure.

    I however, do agree with your conclusion: Math is not the language of the universe. To prove this we would need to show that there is no mathematical statement that can describe something about the universe. Even then that may not be enough. Essentially our view is too small to be able to justify such a claim.

  • (Preface: I love the videos, I'm going through them one-by-one. Usually I'm uniquely unqualified to comment, but this video is perhaps an exception.)

    To consider whether math is a lanugage, it's really helpful to go to the fields that study lanugage. There are many characteristics of human language, which you're not going to get by relying on dictionary definitions. One loses the interesting characteristics of both math and language by trying to equate them.

    I would consider math to be a special subset of language, used in a specific domain. It's unusual because it has its own strict grammar, very different from human languages. The meanings of mathematical statements are of a different kind. It would be related to programming languages and the rules of logic.

    Math doesn't deal with emotional states, nor could any community function using only math as a language. "I love you." "Let's go to the seashore." "I think there's something funny about that guy." How would you say these in Math-Speak? Human language has to deal with all the crazy states of mind, actions, and imaginings of a featherless biped.

    I'm guessing that math originated in the jargon used by ancient surveyers and accountants. Originally it described the crafts and processes of specialists: figuring out areas, counting jugs of olive oil. Then it gradually became general and abstract, e.g. with the Greeks.

  • I loved your explanation.
    I was watching a group of scientist talking and
    Neil DeGrasse Tyson (Astrophysict) said "Math is the language of the universe"
    Then Brian Green (Mathematacian and theoretical physicst) "Said how did you know its the language of the universe?"
    And then the debate starts
    I think this videos solved it all
    Thanks again 👍.

  • This one pushed the envelope of being more about philosophy than science. Simple challenges to being a language of the universe can be to try representing any of the following meanings with math: big, sad, or love.
    To qualify the premise a bit, I’d position math as being the quantitative language of the universe. If something in the universe is not about being quantified, then don’t expect to represent it with math effectively.
    (Yes, I was a math major in undergrad.)

  • "Question everything" is not a question. Written with a question mark it sounds like an unsure answer to a question pronounced in up–speak.

  • "no number will every answer those deep philosophical questions"… why not? The only reason why math could not answer a philosophical question would be because philosophy and such questions are just constructs of the human mind, and are subjective and have whatever meaning people assign to them. So you might as well say that math cant tell us how the warp drive in Star Trek works. Ok… sure, but that's because that's not a question about how the universe works.

  • "No number will ever alone have a meaning. Not even 42", they said.

  • Math is the only thing that exists. Prove me wrong. Find a non mathematical model of physics that explains observations more precisely than a mathematical model.

  • The way I see is the other way around
    Math is not only the language of the universe it goes beyond. It has its own universe (like imaginary universe) apart from ours.
    Math is not only the language of the universe but the language of everything

  • Math is a language we made up. A small portion of the mathematical language has been created and expanded precicely because it described some bits of the universe.

    Physics is our attempt to describe the universe at its fundamental levels, and physics used to be done in a spoken language, such Aristotelian logic. But that didn't get us anywhere. So people started using math, and the results were so overwhelmingly good that we just kept on using math, and making up new math when needed.

  • I don't follow your videos ( or anyone elses) in order. I also pay for YouTube Premium so I can listen without commercials. Please don't change your format to give me buttons to interact with, I won't use them. I also understand I'm just one viewer.

  • all our languages and writings are different but we all use the same digits and decimal counting. Imagine if each nation had it's own number system? it's bad enough with now english/metric.

  • Math is the science of logical consistency. The reality is thus logically consistent. Without consistency there would be no scientist.

  • Walk up to a girl and say:

    "The change in where something is, is the same as, the difference between, where that something is in end and where that something is at the beginning"

  • I don’t get why you assume that math isn’t the language of the universe based on the fact that one mathematical thing doesn’t have meaning. All language doesn’t have meaning. If a given set of words and symbols sometimes communicates meaning and sometimes doesn’t that still doesn’t make it a language.

  • There is a movie called “Pi, the order of chaos” that says this a lot. It is a good movie though. Of course a fiction movie. About your video I agree in everything.

  • Just like computer language is used to communicate with computer maths is the language which helps us to communicate with reality.and i love reality so much.not that reality that i am a crazy person but reality like how exactly atom look exactly proton look like.

  • Here's an argument for math being a language: There are concepts that exist in certain languages but don't in others, like how some native American languages don't have words for advanced things, like one that was used in one of the world wars so messages arent leaked to the germans which doesnt have a word for artillery or machine gun so they named them something to the lines of "big gun" or "small fast gun".

  • The closest thing to being the language of the universe is energy. Different forms of energy seems to be communicated throughout our universe and math is our tool to decode and quantify it. But thats just within the perspective of a human. I wonder what the language is in the perspective of a GOD. Something our mind is not designed to comprehend fully.

  • I guess we just see things differently on this topic. To me the question is, can you communicate with other beings across the universe to some degree within moments by using math? The answer i think would be an overwhelming yes in most cases. It may be limited but its the only thing that could accomplish such a thing with any intelligent being from any background. Therefore universal, just because it might be the baby language doesnt make it any less of one, just like since Pluto isnt a terrestrial or Jovian planet doesnt make it any less of one. Dwarf planet, Kuiper planet… Its still a well shaped world that orbits a star, its a planet…

  • Math made my childhood and teenage years a living hell. I just remember sitting at the kitchen table or my school desk and having one, two or even three aduts standing over me saying "if x equals so and so, what doesy Y equal? I still hate math.

  • You may want to investigate Godel's Theorem (Parts I & II). Part of his doctoral dissertation, Godel was able to translate all mathematical operations into unique strings of prime numbers that can be combined and operated upon to create and prove theorems. Using these methods he was able to prove that any non-trivial mathematical system is incomplete. Pretty profound and akin, I think, to the nature of the universe. Also, hope you expound on Bell's Theorem and Oblers' Paradox. Thanks for the great and thought provoking videos.

  • Math is a tool for all physics.
    Physics is an explanation for all things within the universe.
    Therefore, math is a tool for explaining all things within the universe.
    (Valid & sound)

    If math is a tool for explaining all things within the universe,
    And a tool for explaining all things in the universe is the language of the universe
    Then math is the language of the universe.
    (Valid & unsound)

    A tool for explaining all things in the universe doesn’t necessarily imply to be a language for the universe.

    A tool used for explanation is not a language.

    Math is not the universal language of the universe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *