On 19 Jan 2015, at 4:40 pm, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That you consider "mod 4" to be a qualifier is just a convention of
>> language. If we were talking about time what's six hours after 1900: answer
>> 0100, because there the convention is mod 24. But my serious point is that
>> arithmetic is a model of countable things we invented and it's not some
>> magic that controls what exists.
>
> What leads you to say relations between numbers are invented rather than
> discovered? Will the person who proves (or disproves) the Goldbach conjecture
> invent that truth (or falsehood), or will he discover it?
>
> Jason
This is indeed the core issue. It seems that whether you believe in this or not
is really a matter of personal taste because it actually cannot be proven
either way.
I merely simplify it by saying (via comp) that number alone is real.
Mathematics is the means by which we are learning to understand the way reality
is encoded, so naturally enough, we should suppose that Mathematics shares some
of the transcendental qualities of number. Did we invent Math or did Math
invent us? That's now better put as "we invented our altogether reasonable
belief that we invented Math" and there is a line of reasoning that explains
why we universal machines would suppose that, something that means that we
continually fail to see that the much longed-for ToE has been hiding all along
in plain sight. It's very annoying, I agree.
In much the same way, a composer writing a piece of music feels that the object
in sound he is creating is actually more like something discovered than
created, the work involved in composing the notes and rhythms etc. more like
the effort required to polish the muck off something to reveal its true nature.
Mathematics is just the infinity of relations between numbers. Your realisation
of that perhaps entails that you worry less about the nature of Math - that's
not the issue.
The real issue is (wait for it) "what is number?" Here, only taste and acts of
faith can have any currency. We all kind of need to get over ourselves
regarding this, I think.
As I said: the world is divided into two tribes, in all cultures and at all
times.
These are: the Gay Platonist Mystics who believe number cannot be accounted for
(even by God) and are annoyingly happy with that, and the Tough Guy
Aristotelian SWAT team who shoot mystics on sight because they don't serve
their type around here.
I also believe I am the first human to draw attention to this fundamental
syzygy of human belief types. I don't think you can reduce Platonist and
Aristotelian to something else. Humans confront the ultimate questions wearing
one or the other of these two masks. I think.
We simply cannot know certain things, boys and girls. There is a limitation to
knowledge. Deutsch is wrong. Get over it already. Incompleteness. There is
always more - mathematical reality: uncountably infinite. And expanding. And
accelerating.
So, it's a simulation - who cares. I gotta tell ya it's a fucking great
simulation and I reckon VR still has a long way to go to beat it. I love it.
Don't ask what is being simulated, please!
Kim
--
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.
