On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote:
> On 7/19/2012 7:09 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>wrote: > >> To fix a typo >> >> On 7/19/2012 3:46 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: >> >> Dear Bruno, >> >> I need to slow down and just address this question of your as it >> seems to be the point where we disconnect from understanding each other. >> >> On 7/19/2012 10:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> At this stage I will ask you to define "physical". >> >> >> The physical is the represented as the sum of >> incontrovertible<http://www.thefreedictionary.com/incontrovertible>facts >> that mutually communicating observers have in common. >> >> Some might say the only incontrovertible fact is "I think therefore I am" but this can't be communicated. > So 2 is prime is physical? > > > Hi Jason, > > Any physical implementation that communicates "2 is prime" is, yes. > Where in physics does the 48th Mersenne Prime exist? How will it be communicated to its discoverer? > The symbols that you are re3ading here, that are communicating to you are > physical, no? Is this somehow being overlooked? > > > You and I might agree on the incontrovertibly that there are an infinite number of primes, but some (an infinite number) are too big for us to communicate in the lifetime of the universe. According to your theory of "to exist is to be communicated between two observers", there would be only a finite number of primes (those short enough to be communicated before the heat death of the universe). > > What about uncertainties, like string theory, or many worlds? Would > those be nonphysical? > > > Indeed! If they can neither be experienced nor communicated then they > are by this definition unphysical. This is not unusual. There are many > solutions to accepted physics equations that are similarly considered > "unphysical" without any controversy. > Would the "physical world" for two observers A and B, be different from two observers C and D? > > > > >> It is those facts that cannot be denied without introducing >> contradictions, thus such things as "hallucinations" and "mirages" are >> excluded. I guess that this definition might seem tautological, but it >> seems to me to be the explanation that has the longest reach in its power >> to explain what is meant by the word. Additionally, physical refers to >> "objects of the world" >> >> What do you mean by "the world"? > > > Earth, This Hubble Volume, Everything beyond it in all dimensions forever, > all branches of the wavefunction, all possible string theories, all > self-consistent structures? > > > Any and all of those that satisfy the definition that I gave above. It > seems that people like axiomatic definitions, so have some. ;-P The point > is that without observers that act as the "to whom meaning obtains" there > is no such thing as meaningfulness. This is my thumbnail argument against > Platonism and any other idealist ontology. > Could you clarify the argument? I don't understand it. > Abstracting away the entity to whom meaning exists is just inverted semantic > externalization<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6405/is_3_68/ai_n58511111/>and > is equally fallacious. We can communicate all day about things, > including ourselves, as if they don't exist, but this does not change any > facts. > Just above you said communication is a requirement for physical existence. Jason > > > > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." > ~ Francis Bacon > > -- > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
