Le 28-juil.-12, à 20:37, Stephen P. King a écrit :

On 7/28/2012 9:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

This is a "degeneracy" problem, everything looks, acts and even is one and the same thing, so how is there any differentiation that allows a plurality to obtain?

 0 ≠ s(0) ≠ s(s(0)) ≠ ....

    I need to explain myself on this claim for the sake of others that might be confused and yet open to understanding.

    The non-equivalence that Bruno points out here with "0 ≠ s(0) ≠ s(s(0)) ≠ .... " is correct, but that correctness changes


when we introduce Godel Numbering. Godel numbering is the coding of statements about numbers as numbers and so has the effect of making the " ≠ " ambiguous

(it is just a translation. Why would a translation make a statement ambiguous?)

and thus making the non-equivalence of numbers degenerate. Once we introduce the idea that numbers can code for other numbers then it follows that numbers are no longer uniquely different from each other. Therefore the plurality of numbers with regard to their ability to define multiple unique quantities vanishes.




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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to