On 5/9/2015 7:41 PM, LizR wrote:
On 10 May 2015 at 12:08, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com <mailto:johnkcl...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
On Sat, May 9, 2015 Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au
<mailto:li...@hpcoders.com.au>> wrote:
> including abstract systems. It is an abstract concept after all.
No it is not! Computation is a physical process just like any other that
uses
energy, takes time, and creates entropy.
Well this is the so-called Aristotle-Plato thing again, isn't it? Since computation is
allegedly implied by number theory, claiming it isn't an abstract process is the same as
denying the objective existence to number theory (or, in an nutshell, denying that 2+2=4
independently of anyone knowing that it does).
To prove your point you need to explain why maths is so "unreasonably effective in the
physical sciences", something I've long been hoping someone will do so I can stop
wasting time worrying about whether I may be just a bunch of equations.
It is just "a bunch of equations" and we pick out the ones that work as descriptions and
predictors. And if there aren't any that work, we try to invent some new ones. It
baffles me that people think this produces "unreasonable" effectiveness.
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.
