: Agreed on this too. Math is merely a tool of ours to
: describe and analyze the physical world. It's
: certainly not more important than what really exists.
I just have to address this one point:
the meaning I was trying to convey was that math is just one of a variety of methods we have of percieving "what really exists". Our senses don't tell us completely what "really exists" either, nor do any of our our old, imagined "logical reasonings" (the old stuff like "rolling balls eventually stop, therefore the naturate state of things is inanimate; and everything falls if given the chance, so the natural placement of things is is down").
All of these are just methods of trying to model what's "really happening" in the universe, and thus, by producing an accurate model in our minds, be able to look to the future of that model; and if the model is accurate, that will map to the future of the "real world".
Er... the point I'm trying to get at is that we can forget the idea of any kind of objective "what really exists", because by definition we can't know that. All we have are models of it, images, and math is as valid a method of modelling as any other.
