Semiotics is the study of signs and sign processing. It explores how meaning is created and communicated through symbols and signs.

As Chomsky reminds us: the structures we use to describe the world are not the world. They are maps of meaning generated by minds, encoded in grammars unknown even to ourselves. Yet we trust them to chart the stars. In mathematics Symbols do not reflect truth: they forge it.

Mathematics is a Logos, written not in words but in structure. A silent language spoken by black holes and falling leaves, by DNA spirals and prime numbers. Are we encoding the world, or is the world already encoded?

“The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics to the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift we neither understand nor deserve.” — Wigner

When determining a logical strategy that is guaranteed to succeed, it's crucial to analyze the worst case. By preparing for the worst-case scenario we ensure reliability and robustness in logical reasoning and problem-solving.

---

In mathematics and logic, we use specific symbols to express clear, precise meanings:

Symbol	Meaning	Example/Explanation
$A := B$ $B =: A$	"A is defined to be B"; "A is defined by B"	Defines equivalence or a definition.
∀	"for all"; "for every"	$∀x∈\mathbb{N}$, meaning "for every x belonging to natural numbers."
∃	"there exists"	∃x, meaning "there exists at least one x."
¬S	Negation of statement S; "it is not the case that S"	¬(x>0) means "it is not true that x is greater than 0."
a∈A	Element "a" belongs to set A	$3∈\mathbb{N}$ means "3 is an element of natural numbers."
∅	The empty set (contains no elements)	∅={}.
A⊂B	Set A is a subset of B	Every element of A is also an element of B.
A⊊B	Set A is a proper subset of B (subset but not equal)	A is entirely contained within B, but there is at least one element in B not in A.
A∖B	Set difference; elements of A not in B	{1,2,3}∖{2}={1,3}.
A∩B	Intersection of sets A and B	The set of elements common to both A and B.
$\bigcap_{i \in I} A_i$	Intersection of a family of sets	Elements common to all sets indexed by I.
A∪B	Union of sets A and B	The set containing all elements from both A and B.
$\bigcup_{i \in I} A_i$	Union of a family of sets	Set containing all elements from sets indexed by I.
A×B	Cartesian product of sets A and B	Set of all ordered pairs from A and B.
$A_1 \times \dots \times A_n$	Cartesian product of multiple sets	Set of ordered n-tuples with elements from each set.

---

These symbols form the vocabulary that allows mathematicians and logicians to communicate complex ideas precisely and concisely.

If ∅, ∞, and π existed long before us, are we not archaeologists rather than architects? Platonists proclaim that mathematics exists independent of any observer. Therefor, mathematics is not invented but discovered: a transcendent realm, where each theorem is a note in a cosmic song, echoing across time and space.

But others, like Nietzsche, scoff: “You did not find a truth. You carved it. And now you bow before your own sculpture.” And nowadays the philosophy of Žižek warns us: When you see mathematics as the universal key, you are gazing through a locked door. The fantasy of a “complete code” often masks a desire for mastery: to reduce the world into a system that can be solved, predicted, tamed. To make all that is wild and wondrous into something calculable. But what if some things refuse to be quantified?

Yet there is a third vision: Mathematics is the language of the universe. If grammar is innate to the human mind, might mathematics be the universal grammar? Do we understand mathematics not because we know everything, but because we are part of everything? We then use mathematics to connect with the music of the cosmos. Not to rule the stars, but to listen to them.

In this view, mathematics is not a tool of conquest, but an act of communication. Not to rule the stars, but to listen to them. Not to define truth, but to dwell within it.

“The mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s or the poet’s, must be beautiful. The ideas, like the symmetries of a crystal or the orbits of planets, must be eternal.” — G.H. Hardy