On Fri, May 10, 2013 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > How could a pseudo-religion, fake by definition, be superior to anything? >
Well, I'd rather be a fake moron that a real moron, wouldn't you? > And why should a religion be illogical? > Because if it deals with big issues as religion does and it is not illogical then the word for that is not "religion" but "science". > there are no evidence that some events lack of explanation, > Not true, as I've said before most numbers have no explanation, they cannot be described in terms of something else. Some of the real numbers like PI or e or the square root of 2 do have a explanation, that is there is a way to generate them to any desired level of precision, but they are the very rare exceptions; Turing proved in 1935 that the vast majority of the real numbers have no explanation. There is no explanation for the non computational numbers, they just are. > so let us not bet on genuine randomness in nature prematurely. > I don't think you could call it prematurely, it took nearly a century for most physicists to be dragged into the realm of randomness and they kicked and screamed every each of the way, but nature didn't care and felt no obligation to conform to human wishes or intuition. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
