# Re: Bruno's blasphemy.

```On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:43 PM, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Jul 21, 11:55 pm, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:55 PM, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Assume both matter and number relations exist.  With comp, the
> existence
> > > of
> > > > number relations explains the existence of matter, but the existence
> of
> > > > matter does not explain the existence of number relations.
> >
> > > Yes it does. Any number relation  that has ever been grasped by
> > > anybody exists in their mind, and therefore in their brain. And as
> > > for the ungrasped ones...so what? It can make no difference
> > > if they are there or not.
> >
> > Perhaps if those "ungrasped ones" did not exist then we might not exist.
>  It
> > is premature to say their existence does not make a difference to us.
>
> The existence of matter can explain the existence of numbers.
> The reverse might also be the case, but that is not a disproof.
>
> > I think may also be incorrect to say we need to grasp numbers or their
> > relations for them to matter.  Consider this example: I generate a large
> > random number X, with no obvious factors (I think it is prime), but when
> I
> > compute (y^(X - 1)) and divide by X (where y is not a multiple of X), I
> find
> > the remainder is not 1.  This means X is not prime: it has factors other
> > than 1 and X, but I haven't grasped what those factors are.  Nor is there
> > any efficient method for finding out what they are.
>
> > Now the existence of these ungrasped numbers does make a difference.  If
> I
> > attempted to build an RSA key using X and another legitimately prime
> number
> > (instead of two prime numbers), then the encryption won't work properly.
>  I
> > won't be able to determine a private key because I don't know all the
> > factors.
>
>
> The contingent fact that is your failure to grasp a mathematical
> truth is makes a difference.```
```

Just above you said mathematical objects only exist if they exist physically
in some brain.  This is a case where the factors are not only unknown by me,
but likely unknown by anyone in the observable universe.

> Mathematical truths are not contingent,
> so
> what difference can they make?
>

If they are not contingent then you accept they exist even without the
existence of the physical universe?  If so, then see my post in the other
thread where I explain how mathematical truth can explain the existence of
life and consciousness.

Jason

--
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