Hi John! "No outside view"!!!! That is the point that I was trying to make from the start. This is why I keep repeating that Numerical Idealism is an insufficient theory of everything; there cannot be an "outside" that acts to distinguish numbers from each other! An interesting discussion of this can be found here: http://kims.ms.u-tokyo.ac.jp/doc/time_XIV.pdf
Onward! Stephen -----Original Message----- From: John Mikes Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 8:19 AM To: email@example.com Subject: Bruno-Colin-dicussion Jan-2011 (Including Stephens initiation of course). After some time spent enjoying 2 heart attacks in 2010 I returned to the computer and found similar discussions to the earlier ones. Maybe the words changed, references, too, conclusions are more sophisticated (?). SOME new members, as well (Please, give me credit for all those poisons the medics stuffed me withp impeding my brain and clarity of mind, if I ever had any such thing. What I see here is a Colin-position pointing to 'theoretical justification of the validity of math-statements' and Bruno's position based on Bruno's position (comp included, valid, or not). Hard to argue because all the sophistication is based on the present status of our limited ignorance and unlimited explanatory breadth of Colin's mini-solipsism (i.e. the part of the world we so far got a glimpse of). Our sciences dwell within and reach out in their conclusions to those unknowables we 'imagine' (calculate?) from that partial view of the so far experienced (and explained by the limited ways). Such is our 'scientific' view and I think none of us can be exempt to that. We think what we think we know. We conclude within. By such limited tools humanity established an incredible technology and descriptions galore to explain it to ignorants within the ignorance. Physics, engineering, bio, psych, etc. etc. And a mathematics - so fundamental in Bruno's words(?) about numbers. What we see is a complex interlacing of not always discernible items allowing more to be involved. Upon such views humanity could not have established its 'scientific' (technological) results, but being anchored into it may interfere with further understanding of the unknown. Of course we cannot think beyond our mind-contents/function limited as it may be. (My fundamentals among others: Colin and Robert Rosen). What the WORLD is, if it exists (what does that mean?) what we call a "universe" or "existence" is hazy. No outside view. With best wishes to 2011 and beyond John Mikes -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.