ERRORS IN SCIENCE Written by KEMKA S. IBEJI

For any years and in the world of academics, it was and has been erroneously held for too many immeasurable years that mathematics is the most precise science. Out of fact and less than the same, it is clearly acceptable that amongst the sciences, mathematics sincerely enjoys more precision than any other species of the sciences especially when the term 'sciences' is delimited to the studies which rely essentially on the provisions and knowledge got through empiricism. By empiricism I wish to mean all knowledge got through sense experience or sensation.

The errors in science which have taken up some knocks from my concern and logical investigation is the overboard or expanded supposition of scientific understanding of that cliché; "mathematics is the most precise science". Whereas the statement is true, its understanding especially by the science world is largely false.

The falsehood derives her faulty strengths from assuming, first, that all sciences are precise. This faulty understanding extends itself by the enthronement of mathematics with unblemished guise and perfect status crown. Clearly but despicably unknown to this unchaste scientific puritanism, the most precise science (mathematics) is unfortunately very imprecise. The acclaimed precision of mathematics, to this elevated understanding, is merely a celebratory convention which hurried to run away from the dangers of infinite regression. No doubt, it is a great achievement in science to have done so since without foundation no science can either be established or practiced. However, it is scientific treachery and epistemic murder to take domiciliation of this faulty-faultless child in emasculation or obliteration of her dear roots.

Reading as a Philosopher of mathematics with garlands of Logic which is the mainstay of mathematics, we discovered in our foray of the Number Theory, which I have always preferred to refer to as the Evolution of Numbers, that whether through Abstraction or Idealization, the foundation of numbers, ala mathematics, is ratiocinative. In this regard, it is unmistakably assured that mathematics is a science of rationalism. This is not be our point of call within this intellectual discourse and so we will not be delineating the questions raised here.

To practice the science of mathematics, the said most precise science, we have realized that numbers are sine qua non. But in the process of acquiring the numbers, many things are left out. It is also important that without leaving out the left outs, numbers will be impossible and the science of mathematics by that would have been a chimera. The question therefore is, how are numbers gotten?

One particular necessity of understanding here is to say that there is no number without a being. For example, when we say One plus One equals Two (1+1=2), we always assume we have done a perfect deal. We nevertheless forget or ignore the necessary question; One what plus One what equals Two what (1 what +1 what = 2 what)? Remember that there is no number without a being. So it means that each of the 1's and the 2 in the equation 1 + 1 = 2 must be of something. That is to say, that the equation must or ought to have been something like 1 Dog + 1 Mango = 2 Something. But if mathematics was done with all the realities on each side of the equation presented, the science will never have started and to talk of its progress would have also been to place the cart before the horse. It therefore implies that mathematics will be impracticable and impossible if certain important factors are not left out.

To achieve the leaving out of debilitating and obstructing factors and doing so to enable mathematics proceed, it became necessary to abstract sameness in all beings concerned in the name of numbers and thereafter go ahead to either add, subtract, divide or multiply.

A mathematical or number skeptist will now ask; "wherein lies the precision of mathematics (and all sciences) if it (the most precise science) thrives on the abandonment and ignorance of necessities?"