Mohsen Ravanbakhsh wrote:
> /All actual measurements yield rational values.  Using real numbers in 
> the equations of physics is probably merely a convenience (since 
> calculus is easier than finite differences).  There is no evidence that 
> defining an instantaneous state requires uncountable information. /
> What about the realizability of mathematical concepts. Real numbers are 
> mathematical, so they should have a counterpart in real world. 

Why?  "Mathematical" means nothing but not self-contradictory.  Sherlock Holmes 
stories are mathematical.  That doesn't mean Sherlock Holmes exists in some 
Platonic realm.

Brent Meeker

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