Le 26-nov.-07, à 04:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :

## Advertising

> > > > On Nov 23, 8:49 pm, Torgny Tholerus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev: >> >> >> >>> As far as I tell tell, all of physics is ultimately >>> geometry. But as we've pointed out on this list many times, a theory >>> of physics is *not* a theory of everything, since it makes the >>> (probably false) assumption that everything is reducible to physical >>> substances and properties. >> >> I think that everything is reducible to physical substances and >> properties. And I think that all of physics is reducible to pure >> mathematics... > > You can't have it both ways. If physics was reducible to pure > mathematics, then physics could not be the 'ontological base level' of > reality and hence everything could not be expressed solely in terms of > physical substance and properties. Are you not begging a bit the question here? > > Besides which, mathematics and physics are dealing with quite > different distinctions. It is a 'type error' it try to reduce or > identity one with the other. I don't see why. > > Mathematics deals with logical properties, I guess you mean "mathematical properties". Since the filure of logicism, we know that math is not really related to logic in any way. It just happens that a big part of logic appears to be a branch of mathemetics, among many other branches. > physics deals with spatial > (geometric) properties. Although geometry is thought of as math, it > is actually a branch of physics, Actually I do think so. but physics, with comp, has to be the science of what the observer can observe, and the observer is a mathematical object, and observation is a mathematical object too (with comp). > since in addition to pure logical > axioms, all geometry involves 'extra' assumptions or axioms which are > actually *physical* in nature (not purely mathematical) . Here I disagree (so I agree with your preceding post where you agree that we agree a lot but for not always for identical reasons). Arithmetic too need extra (non logical) axioms, and it is a matter of taste (eventually) to put them in the branch of physics or math. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---