On 01 Apr 2015, at 21:51, meekerdb wrote:
On 4/1/2015 2:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Well, no, there is no TOE that describes all features of the
physical universe yet.
But if comp is true, there is. If comp is true, the theory with the
axioms Kxy = x + Sxyz = xy(zy), or elementary arithmetic HAVE TO
describe all feature of the physical universe. If not comp is false.
But that's like saying if Catholicism is true then there is a God
who's omniscient. You should be more cautious about the modus
tollens: "There is no TOE hence comp is false."
No problem. There is an infinite scheme of TOEs (when we assume comp).
I have given three in my recent preceding posts. Combinators, RA and a
system of Diophantine equations. If you find something not explainable
in one of them, then comp is refuted. That would be the case for
"classical comp" (that is comp + Theaetetus) if you find a quantum
tautology not provided by Z1*, S4Grz1, or X1*).
It would not be a problem for me if comp is refuted.
Bruno
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
