On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> You fail to explain how the truth of "17 is prime" depends on
> consciousness. You confuse the truth of "17 is prime" with the individual
> belief or knowledge that "17 is prime". Mathematicians believes that "17 is
> prime" is far more objective than any other proposition like "the moon
> exists", or "the big bang exists".
> You should be the one explaining to me why "17 would no more be prime" in
> case humans or life disappear from the physical universe.
Indeed, nature discovered the primality of 13 and 17 (in the reproductive
cycles of the 13-year and 17-year cicadas). I doubt nature or the cicadas
were ever conscious of this mathematical property, at least in the sense
that humans can be conscious of it.
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
For more options, visit this group at