On 17 Jan 2013, at 18:50, Craig Weinberg wrote:

## Advertising

On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 7:06:03 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul Kingwrote:On 1/16/2013 5:32 PM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:> That is the most clear demosnstration that what we perceive is inthe> mind ,and the rest out of the mind is only mathematics (or some kind > of underlying conputation)Mathematics is even further in the mind than geometry (which is why3D geometry is intuitive to any toddler, while learning basicarithmetic takes some work).Mathematics does not exist on its own. It does not haunt the vacuumof distance.

`In your theory. But it has not yet been developed, and it is a bit`

`exhausting that you talk systematically like knowing a truth. You are`

`unclear on your idea, and unclear why they should be a problem for`

`comp, or even for arithmetical realism. I am not sure "mathematics`

`exists" make any sense to me.`

Bruno

Mathematics is two distinctly different (opposite) things:1) A private experience of imagined sensory symbol-figures whichaccompany a motive of quantitative reasoning.2) A collection of public objects interact in a logical way, withoutany private representations, as a consequence of the physics ofmultiple rigid bodies.The problem is that comp seduces us into a shell game whereby whenwe look at math 'out there' (2), we smuggle in the meaning from inhere (1), and when we look at meaning in here (1) we misattribute itto the blind enactment of a-signifying motions among neurophysicalobjects.The only difference between the colors and feelings of privateexperience and the structures and functions which we study inscience is that the colors are experienced first hand and aretherefore described with the full complement of human sense(misleading and conflicting though it may be). We assume that theworld outside of our minds runs on math not because it actuallydoes, but because our awareness of it is a grossly reduced, indirectlogical construction.> > Simply speaking 3D geometry in which we see our body and the rest of > the colored reality is a product of the mind.Not a product exactly, more like an induct. Same with everymeasurement ever made though. It's all an induction of ourexperience (plus the experiences of all of the objects andsubstances, times and conditions involved).>> The quantum and relativistic mathematics lacks a correspondingqualia> of the mind that make them intuitive and "real". They are efectiveand> predictive, but we can not make it apparent and intuitive in ourreality.>Right. That's because QM assumes Math (1) is present in Math (2). Itisn't. You need sensory-motor participation, i.e. afferentperception and efferent participation as a fundamental base beforequantum to make any kind of realism with it.Craig I agree! -- Onward! Stephen --You received this message because you are subscribed to the GoogleGroups "Everything List" group.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/3eq5Nzab1ikJ.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.