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 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to