Bruno wrote:

"What can be said about numbers is that it is
impossible to explain what numbers are to someone who
does not already knows what they are..."

<I will talk about "what numbers do, not 'are'>

"..If a TOE does not implicitly or explicitly
presupposes the existetnce of natural numbers, then
the natural numbers will not be definable in that TOE,
and for this reason that TOE will not be a plausible
TOE. - although Hartree Field, if I remember
correctly, makes a case for a science without
number[s?]. ..."

Friends, we are closer friends than any others in this
world: we share our thoughts, the most intimae of us. 
So I dare share this one with you all:
As I said above: "what numbers do". 
Well, what DO numbers do? -- -THEY DO NOTHING. -  - 
- This is my fundamental objection to the 'hard'
number theory making numbers (and their manipulations)
the basis of them all (I don't dare: nature, world,
existence, etc. as very loaded words over here).
Numbers do NOT add, subtract, etc., WE do it to (by,
with) them. Humans, Loebian machines, whatever, but
NOT the numbers. 
Same argument as against the 'Intelligent Design": a
design does nothing, it requires an operator (factor)
to perform what the design includes. Similarly:
Numbers require factors (operating agents) to perform
any potential which CAN BE PEFRFORMED with/by them. 

If there 'are' only numbers - it stays only numbers. 
That may be a neat world, but without us thinking
about it. Do I miss the numberculus (I don't say:
DOING the operations.

Do I need more faith to believe (understand?) the TOE
based on numbers? I may choose another TOE (if I have

John Mikes

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to