On 6/4/2018 6:50 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
There is not one argument here.
You seem to confuse arithmetical realism, used in all branches of
science, and Platonism (which is part of the consequence). To define
mathematically what a computation is, we need arithmetical realism.
Science doesn't need arithmetical realism in the sense of numbers exist
in a Platonic realm. Science, and everyday life, uses arithmetic as a
language to describe things. Numbers are abstractions from instances of
sets of things.
In SANE04, my definition is redundant because the Church-Turing thesis
makes no sense at without arithmetical realism.
If anyone would believe that arithmetical realism is false, we would
have heard argument that Rieman hypothesis or the twin conjecture or
Goldbach are senseless. But that does not exist.
Descriptions don't exist in the same sense as the thing described.
Brent
If you could avoid ad hominem remark, that would be nice. Also.
Bruno
--
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.
