Hi meekerdb  

Coincidence with Newton's laws proves, to me at least, that the earth orbits 
the sun
rather than the inverse. There's too much mass on the sun to have it orbit the 
earth.
 


[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 
1/10/2013  
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen 
----- Receiving the following content -----  
From: meekerdb  
Receiver: everything-list  
Time: 2013-01-09, 15:55:18 
Subject: Re: Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism. 


On 1/9/2013 7:05 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: 
> 
> On 09 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Richard Ruquist wrote: 
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Bruno Marchal  wrote: 
>>> 
>>> On 08 Jan 2013, at 15:59, Roger Clough wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> Hi Bruno Marchal 
>>>> 
>>>> Whoever invented the word "God" invented atheism. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Not necessarily. The modern notion of God comes with the platonist, and was 
>>> almost a synonym with "truth". There was an implicit, but reasonable 
>>> assumption, that humans search truth. Atheism has arised by reaction to 
>>> *imposed* notion of God, and, unfortunately, throws the "theology" baby 
>>> with 
>>> the clerical bath water. 
>>> Before, God was a scientific hypothesis, more or less equivalent with the 
>>> idea that there is a reality which transcend us. 
>> 
>> Agreed but your next statement is too restrictive in my opinion unless 
>> you mean experimental proof. For sure there is arithmetic proof that 
>> goes beyond experimental proof in scope. 
> 
> I prefer to keep the term "proof" in the strong logician's sense (formal or 
> informal). 
> I would talk only on experimental *evidence*. 
> 
> You are right that proof usually can go much farer than any evidence. We know 
> that there  
> is a prime number bigger than 10^10000, but have no 
> experimental evidences at all for that! 

And we know that the Earth orbits the Sun - but there is no mathematical proof 
of that.  
Mathematical proofs are always relative to axioms and rules of inference. 
Empirical  
proofs can be ostensive. So I think the two kinds of 'proof' have little in 
common.  
Mathematical proofs are about transforming one set of propositions into others. 
They are  
relevant to empirical propositions only insofar as there is an interpretation 
that maps  
the axioms to facts. 

Brent 


> 
> But I am saying something stronger: that many arithmetical truth are just 
> beyond proof  
> (not just beyond experimental evidence). The simplest one is the consistency 
> of PA,  
> which is true but impossible to be proven by PA. Note that by the 
> *completeness theorem*  
> (G?el 1930), 
> consistency is equivalent with "having a model", or having a (mathematical) 
> reality  
> satisfying the axioms. Self-consistency is already an assertion, made by some 
> machine,  
> that there is a transcendental (with respect to that machine) reality. 
> 
> Bruno 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Richard 
>> 
>>> By definition it cannot be 
>>> proved to exist, not even named. Exactly like "arithmetical truth" has to 
>>> appear for any sound machine. 
>>> 
>>> Bruno 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 
>>>> 1/8/2013 
>>>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen 
>>>> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
>>>> From: Bruno Marchal 
>>>> Receiver: everything-list 
>>>> Time: 2013-01-08, 09:52:18 
>>>> Subject: Re: Science is a religion by itself. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 07 Jan 2013, at 19:47, John Clark wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Consider God, a word for Mind 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> OK, I have a mind therefore I am God. 
>>>> 
>>>> I said it before I'll say it again, for some strange reason that is 
>>>> unknown to me many people are willing to abandon the idea of God but not 
>>>> the 
>>>> word G-O-D. Those letters and in that sequence (DOG just will not do) MUST 
>>>> be preserved and it doesn't matter what it means. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> GOD means the reality in which you believe. It is, imo, a bit more neutral 
>>>> than "Universe", which is the third Aristotelian God, and which does not 
>>>> belong to what constitutes the "being" for the Platonist. Since about 1500 
>>>> years, the term "God" has acquired many christian cultural colors, but 
>>>> there 
>>>> is no reason to identify God with the God-father of Christian "theory". 
>>>> God 
>>>> has no name, in many theologies, so all terms to designate it can only be 
>>>> a 
>>>> fuzzy pointer. Tao is not bad, as it has many similar qualities than the 
>>>> abramanic god, but with a less "person" feature. I use the term God to 
>>>> designate whatever transcend us and is responsible for our existence. With 
>>>> comp, I am open to the idea that (arithmetical) truth can play that role, 
>>>> and this is exploited in the arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus 
>>>> 'neoplatonism'. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Bruno 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 
>>>> 
>>>> --  
>>>> 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. 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --  
>>> 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. 
>> 
> 
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 
> 
> 
> 

--  
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.

Reply via email to