On 1/18/2015 9:40 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 9:51 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 1/18/2015 7:24 PM, LizR wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 07:14, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 1/18/2015 12:16 AM, Jason Resch wrote:
Because 2+2=4, and there's nothing you (or anyone/anything) can do to
change that.
Sure there is. 2+2=0 in mod 4 arithmetic - which is good for
describing some
things.
I hope you are being flippant and don't really think that disproves what
Jason has
said!
If in doubt consider whether the phrase "in mod 4 arithmetic" was necessary
to what
you wrote. If it is, then arithmetic remains necessarily so until you can
come up
with something that is self-contradictory /without/ any such qualifiers
being required.
As you must know from my other posts, I don't consider self-consistency to
entail
existence. So the fact that 2+2=4 is true doesn't imply anything about
existence.
It implies the existence of an equality relation between (2+2) and 4. Other facts, such
as "the Nth state of the execution of the UD contains a subject who believes his name is
Brent Meeker" is a fact that implies the existence of other things,
You continually assume that the truth of some mathematical relations imply the existence
of things (like a running UD), which begs the question.
such as Brent Meeker's conscious state in which he doubts in the significance of
mathematical truths in relation to existence and reality.
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?
Some are discovered, from the properties we invented (like every number has a
successor).
Will the person who proves (or disproves) the Goldbach conjecture invent that truth (or
falsehood), or will he discover it?
He will discover a sequence of inferences from Peano's axioms to Goldbach's
conjecture.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
