We're open to any questions.

@JustGoneNow I believe it's both. Humans invented what we know as math to understand that which has always been.

A poor example could be words. Depression has always existed, but until the word was invented we couldn't fully comprehend it.

I might not be explaining it very well. Sorry.

@PolyamorousPlaymates Naw, I feel that’s fairly accurate. The circumference of a circle existed before we had values to express it as a concept but the invented math gives numerical values to those discovered pre existing attributes.

@PolyamorousPlaymates Furthemore, If math was different (such as a better base 12 system instead of the currently accepted Hindu–Arabic base 10 numeral system,) then the value of the circumference of a circle would be expressed differently but as a discovered natural attribute, nothing would have changed. Good answer. Which of you gave the answer?

@JustGoneNow Jessica gave this answer and most of us agreed. Arthur still insists it's a discovery.

@PolyamorousPlaymates Brains are sexy. To Jessica. 😘

@JustGoneNow On the circumference of the circle, this is actually not so much a philosophical problem but a topic in math itself! It's about a connection between geometry and numbers! (two different kinds of math) You can also read this piece by the magnificent Terry Tao:

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/what-is-a-gauge/

@Sandcastler I’ll check it out. ty.

@Sandcastler interesting article but that doesn’t really change my question here at all, as it more so supports the thought that something like the circumference of a circle can be expressed (and perhaps even better so) through the gauge system illustrated in the article, but that didn’t actually change the circle or it’s circumference as a physical thing (discovered,) but merely how it’s conceptually expressed (by another invented system.) I did enjoy the article, however… so ty.