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 


-----Original Message-----
From: Quentin Anciaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 
is not an answer.


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