On 2/9/2011 7:57 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
1Z,
How do you define existence? For something to exist must it be
something you can see and feel, or would you say it has to be
something that can be studied objectively? Would you agree that for
something to have objective properties, it must exist? Clearly there
are things humans have discovered which we can't see or feel, but we
think they exist because we see their effects: wind, dark matter,
black holes, etc. Or theories suggest their existence: extra-solar
life, strings, and so on.
I would argue that mathematical objects exist because this universe's
existence does not make sense in isolation. Imagine you were in a
windowless bathroom. Should you doubt the existence of the rest of
the world because you cannot see it, or would there be clues to
support the existence of things outside that room? The finely tuned
physical constants, laws, dimensions, etc. of this universe suggest
that this universe is one of many, perhaps one among all possible
structures. Just as we see the affects of wind and know it exists,
one can look at the fine tuning of this universe and believe in the
existence of all possible structures. Every such structure is a
mathematical entity. If you doubt the existence of mathematical
objects, how do you explain fine tuning? (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe )
Jason
Fine-tuning is a very speculative and poorly supported peg to hang
existence on:
http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Fallacy/FTCosmo.pdf
Brent
--
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.
