On Sep 25, 2012, at 11:05 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
On 9/25/2012 8:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sep 25, 2012, at 10:27 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
On 9/25/2012 4:07 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
Yes. If we cannot prove that their existence is self-contradictory
Propositions can be self contradictory, but how can existence of
something be self-contradictory?
Brent
Brent, it was roger, not I, who wrote the above. But in any case I
interpreted his statement to mean if some theoretical object is
found to have contradictory properties, then it does not exist.
Sorry.
No worries.
So you mean if some mathematical object implies a contradiction it
doesn't exist, e.g. the largest prime number. But then of course the
proof of contradiction is relative to the axioms and rules of
inference.
Well there is always some theory we have to assume, some model we
operate under. This is needed just to communicate or to think.
The contradiction proof is relevant to some theory, but so is the
existence proof. You can't even define an object without using some
agreed upon theory.
Jason
Brent
--
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.
