# Re: COMP refutation paper - finally out

```
On Aug 9, 2011, at 1:38 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

```
```On 8/8/2011 9:16 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
```
```

```
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com > wrote:
```

```
I am getting a bit tired of labouring this point, but honestly your theory is postulating something that seems nonsensical to me. Why on earth would I believe in the truth of something that *can never be known in any way*
```(namely, that arithmetics is true without / prior to consciousness)?

Ben,

```
Do you think that the 10^10^100th digit of Pi has a certain value even though we can never know what it is and no one has ever or will ever (in this universe at least) be conscious of it? If I assert the digit happens to be 8, would you agree that my assertion must be either true or false? If so, where does this truth exist?
```
```
Note that one cannot say it has an indefinite or value, or that its value is inconsequential because that level of precision will never make a difference in any equation we work with. Euler's identity: e^(Pi * i) + 1 = 0, would be false without each of the infinite digits of Pi having a definite and certain value. These values that are unknown to use, but nonetheless must be there.
```
```
Mathematical existence isn't a matter of being "there", it's a matter of satisfying, making true, a certain proposition. So why does the putative digit of pi have the value it does, because it satisfies certain propositions which we infer from other propositions we are pleased to hold hypothetically true as axioms.
```
```
Then what is the ontological status of propositions that are true but not provable in ones set of hypothetitcally held axioms?
```
```
In that case there is something that is true but not reachable through chains of propositions.
```
```
```Existence in the usual sense never enters into it.
```
```
Do you think our universe is mathematical or magical?

```
If our universe can be understood mathematically then it is one example of a mathematical object that has physical existence.
```
What more evidence would you need to believe mathematical objects exist?

```
QM shows the existence of perhaps an infinite number of solutions to the wave function. String theory has nothing in it which rules out other universes with different physical laws.
```
```
Why believe only the math of string theory has been blessed with phyical existence? You might say because we cannot see those other universes.
```
```
This is not evidence against the theory because the theory explains why you would not observe them. Occam also fails here, for the proposition that all possible structures exist has fewer assumptions than the idea that only these structures exist and no others are possible.
```
```
The fine tuning of the universe confirms to a high probability that something is wrong with the following proposition: There is only one set of physical laws with physical existence and these laws were not intelligently chosen.
```
So I ask you, where is the error in that statement?

```
The only way to escape it is to say the idea of fine tuning itself is flawed, but this is a last ditch attempt to stick to the model of a single universe. The bulk of evidence points strongly to the idea that intelligent life would not arise in the majority of possible structures.
```
Use baysian analysis to consider the following possibilities:
1. There is one set if laws not intelligently selected.
```
2. The laws were intelligently selected or there is more than one set of physical laws.
```
```
Since we have evaluated no other evidence at this time, let's assign a 50% chance to each.
```
```
Now let's say we determine the probability of any given set of laws having the right properties for life is one in 100. What would baysian analysis say of the new probability that proposition 1 is correct?
```
```
Faced with proposition 2, would you be more likely to accept intelligent design or the existence of other (or all) mathematical structures?
```
```
Mathematical existence isn't sone fuzzy abstract form if existence. Look around yourself. You are in it.
```
Jason

```
```

Brent
--
```
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 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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to