On 24 October 2014 09:09, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/23/2014 12:37 AM, LizR wrote: > > On 23 October 2014 15:29, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 10/22/2014 7:12 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:30 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]> >> >> > Quantum mechanics assumes real and complex numbers. >> >> >> Quantum mechanics works very well, but every time we've tested it >> with experiment the values we put into it and the values we measure after >> the experiment have only had values at best a dozen or so places to the >> right of the decimal point. Are we justified in extrapolating from that >> that it would work just as well if there were a infinite number if digits >> to the right of the decimal point? I honestly don't know. >> >> I think it's just a convenience for reasoning about rational numbers. >> But then I also think rational numbers are just part of our model of the >> world. >> > > That isn't too surprising. Anything we can think about is part of a > model of the world. > > > But you left out the "just". > > Yes, because if you're going to retreat to a "just a model of the world" viewpoint then you have to be prepared for the fact that it affects everything else. You're basically postmodernising the entire scientific enterprise.
-- 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.
