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.

##
Advertising

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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---