Is isomorphism or a one-to-one correspondence a mathematical concept or a metamathematical (or metaphysical? another complication in the discussion) concept? I take them as mathematical concepts, so that speculating about isomorphisms of things like the multiverse is in itself assuming that the multiverse is mathematical. I don't think we can use the one-to-one correspondence when it comes to metamathematical questions like the multiverse (or philosophy of everything), but this is simply because I assume that the multiverse (or "everything") is metamathematical.
Tom -----Original Message----- From: Quentin Anciaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:05:17 +0100 Subject: Re: Numbers Le Jeudi 16 Mars 2006 21:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : > Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > What properties of the multiverse would render only one mathematical > > object real and others abstract... > > A non-mathematical property. Hence mathematics alone is not sufficient > to explain > the world. QED. Hmmm... okay, so last questions what is an abstract thing ? what does it means to be abstract ? what render a thing real ? what does it means for it to be real ? what does it means to be real ? An answer like to be real means to exist or to be instantiated in the reality is not an answer. Quentin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
