On 3/4/2016 12:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Einstein made clear when he use the good lord as a parable and when it is not. See the book by Jammer. It explains why God was against atheists (which at that time was what we call non-agnostic atheists today). Einstein refer to the mystical sight of wonder in front of the fact that the universe is comprehensible. Today we have progressed, and we know that if we are machine Einstein's God (a 100% intelligible Aristotelian reality) does not exist, but the insight of Einstein remains correct for the "new" God (arithmetical reality), and in that case it is conditionally justify by the incompleteness theorem. But being refuted is the honor of the scientist. It also vindicate Gödel's remark to Einstein that theology is a science.
But this quite circular. Einstein was wrong about the universe being comprehensible; it included randomness and Einstein refused to accept that on aesthetic grounds. He believed the universe was deterministic by faith, not evidence. When Everett proposed QM without collapse many people were attracted to it just because it was deterministic. So then having found a deterministic model of QM, you want to take that as evidence that arithmetic (or Turing computation) is fundamental. It's an assumption supported by an assumption.
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
