specifically, i've been into math my whole life, and I've only recently begun studying earth sciences.
Both, I'd say, are in some sense "real", and have some level of bearing on our life. It's useful and interesting to study the physical phenomena that we can see in front of us and in the background of our world even when we don't think about them. It's also useful and interesting to study the commonalities that different systems can have, when they follow certain given rules and ideas.
Because of the way we can always see earth sciences happening in front of us, with their ever-fractal processes we will probably never fully understand, there's a sense of unknown we're always reminded of. Mathematics, inherently, is tucked behind the systems we know in some way. It's generally not directly in sight, and requires intention to notice. And it's typically considered a "rules-first" field, so its bounds are clearly defined - even if its consequences aren't.
In a sense they're not that different actually. Both mathematical systems and physical systems are ones we understand (at least well enough?) the most basic mechanisms of, at this point in history, with the abstraction-first, universalism-first mindset the West pursues with its science (or more likely, I've been deluded by that mindset into thinking we understand those mechanisms.) But both are concerned, deeply, with consequences of those systems so complex that they may never be understood. Systems that never stop spiraling out with their logic.
The difference only being that with physicality, you know the answer - you see lightning, you see the shapes of the plants in hot and cold regions and how they differ. But you don't know how that result came to be. We can guess what the answer to the Riemann Hypothesis is, but we can never know what the answer is unless we also know why.
The beauty of physical science is that the answer to "why" can be a partial one. Math asks you to know every detail, really. It requires of you to go through every single little step. Meticulously, carefully, even the most inconsequential little thing cannot be ignored. But physical science - there's so much of it that you'll never be able to understand it all. It forces you to have a big picture philosophy in some ways, at least sometimes. You have to skim over the details. You have to accept contradictions and illogic here and there. Accepting little unrealities for an ever-more-wonderful reality.
we like that a lot
we collect ways of thinking, which means we wind up making a lot of comparisons like this. it's always nice to see someone else doing it <3
aside: I also think some of this is university math education makes a lot of assumptions about what people know, but very little earth sciences are taught in public school anymore so they need to start at a much lower level.
(but also DK has a much different conclusion (and the data tells a different story) than is commonly mythologized)
the further removed your field is from practical affairs—real matter and energy, real flesh and blood—the easier it is for fakers and frauds to assert themselves. money is the ultimate abstraction here, because the whole premise of "business" is that all things can be equated to a quantity of money, and that's an abstraction that stomps the entire Cosmos flat ~Chara
(EDIT: oh, I'll add this too about mathematics, which people tend to think of as something unreal and abstract—some of our knottiest problems in math have to do with practical things like packing geometric shapes into other shapes, and stuff like that. math can be tremendously abstract and yet the abstractions peep through everyday life at all times)
