I think this is funny because it explains a problem I’ve had with math all along, which is that math just makes stuff up: makes up number, and space between numbers, and relations between numbers, and I’m not even mentioning zero. Also I know that the horizon problem went something like, the universe shouldn’t have been born as uniform as it was because it was farther across than light — which created the uniformity — could have traveled by then. Something like that. So AG’s mathematicians solve the problem by making light travel faster than light. For some reason, physicists resent that. Now that I reflect on it, I suspect that AG and I are the only ones who think this is funny.

Credit:* http://abstrusegoose.com/316*

I do find this funny but I have no idea why…except I relate to the hand in the air.

I think what i find funny is that physicists are so worried whether their theories will turn out to be real, and mathematicians just say “Reality? Pssh.”

I have always suspected that economists just make things up, but perhaps that’s because, like astronomy and higher math, I have trouble understanding economics.

I don’t understand economics either, but with math I just hit a blank, infinite wall.

Another funny thing is that physicists have to use the funny made up things (i.e. numbers) to prove “real” things that happen.

I suspect infiltration from the mathematicians’ camp here, Nick. Though I admit, a sound and convincing argument.

Charitable interpretation of the mathematician’s point: Here’s an explanation of the horizon problem we think might be more plausible. They are being kind of trollish though, probably because they probably can’t defend the “more plausible” part.

I am new here but your AG digests are pretty cool! Keep ’em coming.

I think of the mathematicians’ point as less of an explanation than a quick fix. I’m glad you like AG.

Scientists need math for things that the Chinese have known for thousands of years. Math is rubbish, then again, so is physics.