On 18 Aug 2012, at 17:38, Roger wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

There is ontological genocide here of everything but numbers.

Yes. It is not so a problem, as what we consider real from inside is not the ontology, but the bigger epistemological reality which emerges from the ontology, whatever it is if it is sigma_1 complete (Turing universal).

"Concrete" (below) is here used as a mathematical type,
the implication beuing that the world is made up exclusively of numbers.

This phrasing can be misleading. The world is not make up of numbers. The worlds are better described as being dreamed by numbers. If you, Roger, dream of a chair, you would not say that the chair is made up of Roger, OK?

What ever happened to the Higgs boson ? What natural number is it ?

Excellent question. The detailed answer should look like:

numbers ---> self-reference ---> probability on self-continuation ---> arithmetical quantization ---> quantum symmetry groups ---> particles ---> boson.

the part "numbers ---> self-reference ---> probability on self- continuation ---> arithmetical quantization" has already been done. The part "quantum symmetry groups ---> particles ---> boson" is very complex.

Whatever happened to meatballs ? Are they rational or irrational numbers ?

Can you eat numbers ?

No, but the point is that person supervening on number relations can dream (live) that they eat meat.

"Concrete Number
a number that is accompanied by the name of a unit of measure (for example, 5 m, 7 kg);

it is contrasted with an abstract number (for example, 5, 7). A concrete number is termed simple

if it includes only one unit of measure and compound if it includes several units of measure. For example,

the concrete number 3 m 67 cm is compound, but the equivalent concrete number 367 cm is simple."


That only applies to the world of mathematics. Number just means number, it cannot be for example something phnysical like a meatball.

You are completely right. But once you postulate the laws of addition and multiplication, numbers organized themselves a lot, and that is what lead to dreams of physical things. Physical things don't exist ontologically, or "really". Physical things are just unavoidable stable and partially shared experiences by persons supervening on computations, existing in arithmetic. This has the advantage of explaing where the physical realm comes from, + the incompleteness gift which explains why it divides into quanta and qualia, in the discourse of the self-observing machines/ numbers.



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