On 6/15/2014 5:01 PM, LizR wrote:
On 16 June 2014 11:08, meekerdb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 6/15/2014 3:03 PM, LizR wrote:And it depends a lot on what you think about mathematics; whether it's just a precise and and strictly logical subset of language or whether it's really real ur-stuff. Yes, that's one way to rephrase what I just said. My only addition is that if you think the former, then you should explain why it works so well.I should think that's obvious. What "works to well" was invented by us to describe the world as *we* experience it.I don't buy that solipsistic stuff. I'm fairly sure the science we've "invented" could have been /discovered /by anyone in the universe.Notice we keep having to invent new mathematics as our instruments and observations get better.You keep trying to slip in "invented" as though we aren't discovering how the world works. But we are, as having it kick back in thousands of ways (computers work, aeroplanes work, antibiotics work, rockets to the Moon work...) has shown.
Why does it show that rather than the success of our invention. You seem determined to look at the result only in one way. I'd say what we discover is which description's work with which phenomena.
Brent -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
