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 [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
