"Right" and "consistency" and "mathematics" and "World"

1. Mathematically correct
Proposition P p:1+2=3 1+2=3. That's right.
Proposition Q Q: addition supports commutative law. That's right.
Proposition R r:2+1=3 2+1=3. That's right.
Discerning eye know that these three propositions are correct at the first glance.
If you learn a bit of logic again, you can deduce the conclusion that:
P∧q→r P\land Q\rightarrow R
Now think, what is right. Or, what are the characteristics that are correct?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OK, I want to say the answer.
Have "consistency"correctly.
To be exact, it is deduced from the correct conclusion that the correct conclusion must be obtained.
So in this case, let's think of the opposite of "right"--" wrong ".
Correct add error, error plus correct, error plus error, these things can not be guaranteed to get "right", as you mix water and water will certainly get water, but you put water and brine, brine and water, brine and brine mixed together, will not be pure water.
Fortunately, there is no "brine" in the vast mathematical system that we humans have built up so far (I do not dare say absolutely), mathematics began to build from the foundation, along with the development of the branches of theorem and inference, from beginning to end is consistent, we will and this towering giant tree consistent things called "right".
I don't know if it's possible to build another tree in the logical space that's not consistent with "math," maybe not--I admire and believe in math, I believe in the perfect consistency of mathematics, and I trust that the world is a mathematical construct.
After clearing the above conclusions, we can say:

consistency + math = correct.

Or a bit more radical:

It is bullying to put aside math to talk right.

In this way, we define the word "correct" as a mathematical noun.

2. Consistency
We try to put mathematically perfect consistency in the real world, but the results are often frustrating. For example, some people like to eat sweet, some people like to eat salty, some people like to eat spicy, then how to define "delicious". I said the food is "delicious", then this sentence is not "correct" it.
We find that mathematically perfect consistency is completely ineffective in the real world. We hear all kinds of "advice" every day, a wide variety of contradictions, so we decided to believe in ourselves, but after encountering setbacks and want to trust others, and finally we can only tell ourselves "correct and wrong", but we do not even reference, we do not know how to "distinguish between"; we go to lectures, read biographies, To find a reference, but found their world set on their own, it does not work.
Leaving the mathematics, consistency seems so ridiculous, so illusory.
There is no absolute, that is, consistency in the real world of weakness.

But does the world really have no consistency?
people other than him will die in 200 years ' life.
This is a well-known conclusion, although we do not have any means to prove it, even we can not perfectly define "human", "Live" and "Die".
(Plato: Man is not a feathered two-legged upright animal)
So how did this conclusion come about? It's simple, because no one has ever lived that long in today's record.
OK, so now we have a mathematical model:
to the world in addition to all the "human" as an individual, define its "life" as a characteristic, the unit is the year, the statistics of all individuals in this feature, the maximum value of less than 200, so the other people except him will live for 200 years to die. The
is completed. The correctness of the
mathematical model is obvious, but the premise of the whole problem is not exactly the same as the mathematical model, the mathematical model and the conclusion , such as "he", "Man", "Life", "Live" and "death" can not be precisely defined, "year" Nor is it a fixed-length unit, and the effect of jet lag on time calculations, and even relativity, can affect these inconsistencies.
We just put the premise of the reality into the mathematical model of the premise, and then introduced the mathematical model of the conclusion, and then into the reality of the conclusion. The
mathematical model constructs the bridge between the world and the world, the bridge itself is absolutely stable, but the connection between the present and the bridge is not strong, we call the consistency in the present life as " fuzzy consistency ". "Fuzzy" is the same concept as "fuzzy" in fuzzy mathematics.

3. Mathematical Models
In fact, we can't study the world at all, and everything we study is a mathematical model.
The physics and chemistry we all know are the laws of the present that have been abstracted into mathematical models to be studied.
This abstraction is seemingly precise but not necessarily, no matter how many examples are in support of these conclusions, abstractions are always abstract and impossible to prove, so they are called laws rather than theorems, because these conclusions are based on the law of universal observation.
Hundreds of years ago, Newton established Newton's mechanical system; Later, the theory of relativity overturned Newton's mechanics and established the relativistic mechanics system; But we still don't know what else is going to overturn the theory of relativity. Physics in the field of observation (time hopping, high dimensional space, ...) ) appears to be extremely powerless, but some mathematical tools can easily handle these things.
Not only physics, but all the elements of the world are considered mathematical models when studied. When you try to explain something to someone, if you don't understand it, it means that your understanding of the theory is inconsistent, in other words, the world view is different.
I think of myself as a world researcher, the object of which I am studying is the law of the world, and here I am actually abstracting the world into a mathematical model, and you are looking at this nonsense and you have abstracted the world into a mathematical model to understand. If you have a different understanding of the concept of "math" and "physics" here, I congratulate you-

The mathematical bridge between us is "blurred".

4. Irrelevant content
So far did not understand that a day boast still forcing others to listen to his blow of the "right" in the mouth of the group said that what is the point.
The theory of the brain hole came out today. It's not too apt to put it on top.