Is Mathematics reliable for understanding 'reality'?

Is Mathematics reliable for understanding 'reality'?
I have a curious basic question that is stuck in mind for long. How far is Mathematics representative of reality, the physical world? It seems silly and not worth the time of someone who is far advanced in scientific knowledge. But as I read a bit, I seem to get stronger on the grounds for my doubt, but I am not there from where I can posit the question in a ‘mathematical’ fashion. But, I feel that if the question is capable of producing uncertainty, all theories that work backwards or forwards on mathematical equations could come under cloud. The lofty heights of knowledge of a distant past and a remote corner may be just fantasizing.
I am aware I look stupid. The vast progress in science has been on the back of Maths, with mind-boggling achievements like exploring outer space and sending satellites that are remote controlled with precision based on Maths.
My mind seeks conviction that Maths is a true measure of reality out there. My mind does not seek similar confirmation about the reality itself.
Some quotations
David Hume:
“Mathematical propositions must pay a price for yielding absolute truth about anything which exists, about any matters of fact. Mathematics is only empty, abstract, formal truth, which tells you nothing about existence. No proposition which states a relation between ideas (the propositions of arithmetic, geometry, algebra or logic) can establish any truth about existence. Thus there is a trade off. Statements about formal relations of ideas, like 2+2=4, give us knowledge which has certainty, but on the other hand it is merely formal truth, empty, abstract, it gives no information about existence. Statements about matters of fact, on the other hand, give us information about facts, about existence, but they provide no certainty, not even a basis for probability.”
“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” Albert Einstein
Russell: "Not only is mathematics independent of us and our thoughts, but in another sense we and the whole universe of existing things are independent of mathematics."
" .. pure mathematics can never pronounce upon questions of actual existence : the world of reason, in a sense, controls the world of fact, but it is not at any point creative of fact,and in the application of its results to the world in time and space, its certainty and precision are lost among approximations and working hypotheses."
“.. mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.”
“A book should have either intelligibility or correctness; to combine the two is impossible, but to lack both is to be unworthy of such a place as Euclid has occupied in education.”
Proof of induction is basic to Maths. That is assumptive.
For long we believed in Euclid and even today, we work with it in school and even in engineering, etc. But, it is not realistic (vide Russell above).

Tradition and culture

Tradition is like a moving average. It is not fixed at a distant past.

September 28, 2014 ·

Tradition

Change is the order of life, while tradition is clinging to the past. Tradition is not the opposite of change, but it opposes sacrifice of aesthetics, and whimsical changes. Tradition is perpetuation of a culmination. While welcoming the new, we retain a past attainment. It may die if enough people do not support it.

September 5, 2014 ·

A cynic has a place in the world, but being a cynic he may not find it.

September 5, 2014 ·

CULTURE

We learn in two ways. One is by observing and imitating. As we grow, we pick up some values and start avoiding what does not suit our values. Though we observe many things, we filter and try not to follow what is disagreeable. It is the former learning that is stronger. The latter is weaker. The former is integrated with the instinct or is habituated. ‘Habit is second nature’. We are programmed to act instinctively. Few are the moments when we reason and act. I am afraid this is true for rationalists as well. Reason is an assumed stance and is not a natural motivator of action.

The emphasis to learn well while young (இளமையிற் கல்) and the advice to provide a conducive environment are well placed. When I went abroad, I was advised that it is easier to get a driving licence if I had not driven earlier in India, because unlearning is harder. (All credit to Indian standards). It happens with most learning.

That brings us to the issue of culture. Where the culture has several positive values like courtesy, cleanliness, consideration for fellow beings, timeliness, etc., the children pick up these as they grow and it is ingrained. Where these values are in books and in distant history like Vedic times, the culture is weak and people act differently from speech. It may require a cataclysm for transformation.

Government and law cannot bring about cultural overhaul. The task lies with parents and teachers. Dr. Abdul Kalam stresses these, but to deaf audience. Fifty years ago, Acharya Kripalani (many may wonder who he is) said, ‘In our time, the teachers knew their subject and showed affection to the students. That is missing now and therefore, we see strife.’ (not his exact words). Fifty years on, his words ring truer today.

Parents are busy goading children to courses that will get them plum jobs and teachers are busy preparing students for passing examinations. Values are talked of as hobby. With that mindset and a frantic preparation for everyone to join a rat race, it is doubtful that India can become a strong country. In countries that are in the forefront today, there is a better work ethic, social fabric and culture. Our pride that we are stronger spiritually and as regards family life may not stand us in good stead. If the values that shape a society are shaky, spirituality is bound to be shallow. An orderly and predictable mundane life is the need and only a proper system of values and culture inculcating such values can give us strength to realize the potential of a global giant.

13/5/2003

Tradition serves a purpose; it imparts stability and continuity. Beyond that, to be rooted in the past entirely will be a grave error. The modern man is a vastly improved and revised edition of his early ancestors and it will be suicidal to revert to a primitive stage.