----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kim Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


>So apparently those who do not scale the dizzying heights of
>metamathematics have no hope of understanding reality?

I never said that, but you simply can't take a theorem about a specific area, 
that is true 
within a context and take it out from that context to try to use it "in 
reality", to 
"give" social explanations. That's what pseudoscience do.

I will say that without mathematical (not methamatematical) knowledge, one 
cannot aspire 
to understand reality (in the terms a physic understand it).

>There will come a time very soon when all of this comp stuff will
>need to be translated into terms the LAYman can understand easily.
>Russell Standish has already made the attempt. I appreciate gratly
>his attempt. Stop wanking off that mathematics is the ONLY script in
>which reality is encoded. It could well turn out to be music.

You are thinking it the other way around - the incorrect one. Music is a small, 
small part 
of physics, and therefore, it's represented by a (quite simple) mathematical 
model. 
Reality is more complex than that model, and other aspects of reality can be 
modelled by 
math different from the one used in the music model, so the reality can't turn 
out to be 
music in that sense.

Well, I'm speaking about the mechanical phenomena of music, that are simple, 
not about the 
way our brains interpret it, that can be quite complex and enjoyable (that's 
why we say 
it's an art).

Jose 

Reply via email to