On 3/15/07, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> > Stathis Papaioannou skrev:
> >> On 3/14/07, *Torgny Tholerus* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Stathis Papaioannou skrev:
> >>>     How can you be sure? Maybe space is discrete.
> >>     Yes, space (and time) is discrete.  Everything in the universe is
> >>     finite, and the universe itself is finite.  Infinity is a
> >>     logically impossible concept.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't see that "discrete" and "finite" necessarily go together. The
> >> integers are discrete, but not finite.
> > No, the integers are finite.  There exists only a finite numer of
> > integers.  There exists a biggest integer N.  It is true that you can
> > construct the integer N+1, but this integer is not a member of the set
> > of all integers.
> This must be computer arithmetic (modulo N?) - not Peano's.  :-)
> >
> > Because everything is finite, you can conclude that the space-time is
> > discrete.
> That doesn't follow.  The universe could be finite and closed, like the
> interval [0,1] and space could still be a continuum.
> But these ideas illustrate a problem with "everything-exists".  Everything
> conceivable, i.e. not self-contradictory is so ill defined it seems
> impossible to assign any measure to it, and without a measure, something to
> pick out this rather than that, the theory is empty.  It just says what is
> possible is possible.  But if there a measure, something picks out this
> rather than that, we can ask why THAT measure?

Isn't that like arguing that there can be no number 17 because there is no
way to assign it a measure and it would get lost among all the other objects
in Platonia?

Stathis Papaioannou

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 

Reply via email to