The most fundemental science?

But that is an entirely different discussion. It is true that proven mathematical truths remain largely static, and therefore constant. It is also true that science is uncapable of providing you with an absolute truth and instead we take inductive logic as being a method providing you with enough justification to say that it is true, yet things may still be untrue (All swans are white, yet in Europe they might be, but there are still black swans in Australia, thus showing how vulnerable scientific inductive logic is).

Besides I would remind you that science does not have idiotic axioms that are not proven. This takes a great deal of fame of mathematical proofs.

In terms of which science is most important (assuming that maths is just applied logic and therefore not a science per se) chemistry and bio are applied physics (chem>bio). To the OP, the most fundamental might be physics, but without chemistry you would be lacking all sorts of things to progress in terms of physics. Without chemistry you would not have polymeric materials for your computer and so on, and all of this could have been discovered using very, very simple mathematics. In fact if you disregard quantum chemistry the entire field is somewhat independent of maths, and for me this makes it so fundamental.

Without chem you would be back in the 18th century.
Without physics we would still be well off although fields like mechanical engineering, skyscrapers and so on would be inexistent, but we would still have all of our nice chemical products.

Yes but without chemistry such inventions would be inconceivable. You cannot refute the fact that chemistry becomes more fundamental here.

(e.g. y = mx becomes f = ma) it becomes physics.

First of all F=ma is not an application of y=mx, instead it is an application of differential calculus. When Newton came out with this second law of motion, he said the resultant force is the rate of change of momentum, i.e d(mv)/dt. Hence applying the product rule we get F = dm/dt(v) + dv/dt(m), so if mass is constant dm/dt = 0, and the equation reduces to F = dv/dt(m), hence F=ma.

More Nobel prizes have been handed out for chemistry than anything else

Erm, nobel prizes have been awarded for physics, chemistry, physiology and medicine, literature and peace since 1901, with a break during the world wars. No one prize has been given more than the others.

hmm I was misinformed then.

Actually looking at the records, the Nobel prize for physics has been awarded more than others, some years there was no one worthy so they just deferred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates