Juergen: > There is the rather harmless kind: the countable one. And some say > there is another kind, a strange one, the one associated with the > uncountable continuum, the one whose very existence many deny. > > Do not lump them together.
Yes, I can see how this distinction might be useful in some esoteric discussions. But it seems (to me) to have little relevance to achieving a successful Theory of Everything. And it might even distract us.. Both kinds of infinities are inaccessible to humans. So they can play no part in our theories. In this sense, I think it's fair to lump them into the pile of things that are not helpful. We cannot build the universe out of pieces themselves we cannot construct. (e.g. Pi) -- Juergen, what do you think about the minimal cellular automaton? Is it a good candidate ATOE (algorithmic theory of everything)? Joel
