Rex, Do you have a non-platonist explanation for the "discovery" of the Mandelbrot set and the infinite complexity therein? How can you make sense of that in terms of the constructivist point of view that you are (I think) compelled to take if you argue against arithmetical platonism? It seems obvious that all possible intelligences would discover the same forms of the Mandelbrot so long as they iterated on z' = z^2 + c, but maybe I am missing the point of your argument.
Terren On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Rex Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> I think an easier way to intuit prime numbers that can't be represented as >> rectangles, only a 1-wide "lines". >> >> While the concept of primes is straight forward, there is an unending set >> of not-so-obvious facts that we continue to discover about the Primes. >> > > Right. My proposal is that this entire infinite edifice is built on top of > our innate sense of "more", "less", and "equal". > > Which I am tentatively advancing as the basis of an argument against > Platonism. > > Rex > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
