>>14304367>Is mathematics like a game of chess?Sort of. Think it this way: you have rules for chess, those are the axioms, mathematics is like theorizing about chess without playing it. "Making a move" here implies assuming more premises.
But also mathematics is different from a game of chess because, unlike with chess, you can translate factical truths into mathematical premises. Mastering mathematics in the sense of mastering the reasoning of what to do with such premises, implies developing a general theory for natural sciences. At the same time, if a natural science requires a specific kind of results, mathematicians focus themselves on such problems.
>But what about pure maths?One of the problems of real life, is that you never know what kind of mathematical theorems you're going to need until you actually need them. This was the case for Einstein with general relativity. "Pure" or "theoretical" math is therefore financed because of their "potential utility".
