Quentin:

I don't know from your wink at the end whether you are half-serious or 
not.
But just in case (and Bruno can do better than I can on this), I think 
I can correctly appeal to Peano's distinction between mathematical and 
linguistic paradox.  The meaning of the symbols is defined at a higher 
level than the encoding itself.  Your statement turns on the word 
"chosen", which is a verb. This goes back to my other post in this 
thread that, in order to keep from going into an infinite regress of 
meaninglessness, defining meaning ultimately requires a person.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Quentin Anciaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 19:02:14 +0200
Subject: Re: The Riemann Zeta Pythagorean TOE

Le Lundi 3 Avril 2006 18:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> GWTW = "01001010110 ... binary("Frankly, my dear,...") ... 
01001101001".

Depending on the chosen encoding scheme, the binary representation 
could be
any finite binary string, even this '0' or '1', in this case all the
information is in fact contained in the encoding scheme (which itself 
of
course can be represented as a binary string using another encoding 
scheme,
and this ad infinitum ;)

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

Reply via email to