Learning calculus in high school made me question everything. You can never measure anything, never mind the area of a circe using calculus. It will only ever be a "good enough" measurement.
There is a point where all of you will finally come to appreciate the limits of rationalism and materialism and let go a bit more.
Generally we think things are far away when it takes a longer time to get to them. We have some reasonable assurance that the speed of light is immutable and so we can measure the distance in our frame of reference by bouncing light off of Pluto. Are you nerd sniping sir?
I am making the distinction of what we perceive to be reality to actual reality.
Distance is a human concept. The moment we stop thinking distance does not exist. It may be a limitation that we perceive distance as something to be overcome through rocket ships and not through other methods.
Time is also in the same category. If you want to read a good book on the topic read “the end of Time quote by Jason Barbour.
I have thought it was interesting that, Christians believe, God became human and of all the things in the universe he could choose to teach about, apparently more than anything it is all about love (of a particular kind, actually).
I think OP understands that calculus is an enormously powerful tool.
I think the OP's point is that much like the Newtonian physics that paired with calculus to put a man on the moon, calculus is a pragmatically magnificent tool that doesn't yield exactly correct or perfectly accurate answers for many questions. Just "enough accuracy for the problem you're solving," in some very real senses.
Huh, what are we talking about here? Calculus does give exact results. What questions are we talking about? Fundamentally statistical questions are going to have inherent uncertainties, its got nothing to do with Calculus.
Still not understanding what your issue is with calculus. I think so far you only have a problem with its outcomes when you feed it garbage. We expect to see "Calculus" diverge when integrating near the lattice spacing. I don't think we wholly disagree but I am doubtful you are going to make headway fighting against calculus.
I don’t have a problem with calculus, I’m just expressing its limitations. Using calculus to know the area of a circle is useful but it never really measures the area of a circle because the area of any circle is infinite.
It is not really about measuring things, but about reaching a definitive answer given some assumptions. Sometimes our notation of numbers get in the way of writing things shortly (instead of infinite decimal places), other times we can use a fraction and be exact on the paper we write on.
I would say calculus is about solving things exactly using infinitesimals and limits. There's also plenty of equations that can only be solved numerically.
What you're saying is in the practical real world we can never measure things exactly. That's true but that's not what I got from calculus. Irrational numbers come to mind (not calculus).
I come to almost the opposite conclusion as you. It is amazing that we can solve equations in spite of infinities.
There is a point where all of you will finally come to appreciate the limits of rationalism and materialism and let go a bit more.