In another thread Brent suggested the "philosopher's nothing" was incoherent. I was wondering if anyone had any ideas on establishing/proving its inconsistency. Thereby proving that something must exist. Here is some idea I had:
1. Premise: No thing (nothing) exists. 2. By "1" it follows that "0 things exist" is true. Further it also follows that the previously quoted statement must always be true and never become false, for them something would exist. 3. Since the truth of that statement must always be true true and never false, (as otherwise "0 things exist" would be violated), then there must be a permanent and meaningful distinction between "true" and "false". 4. Since "0 things exist" is true, it follows that an infinite number of trivial statements also follow, such as: "< 1 thing exists", "< 2 things exist", "< 3 things exist", and these are all true. 5. It also follows that an infinite number of trivially false statements follow, such as "> 0 things exist", "> 1 things exist", "> 2 things exist". 6. All of these infinite statements must remain true, or else something would exist. 7. An infinite number slightly less trivial statements must also always remain true, for nothing to exist: "(3 - 3) things exist" "(the number of even primes > 3) things exist" "(the number of even integer factors of 7) things exist" 8. An infinite number of statements concerning solutions to Diophantine equations must also be true, and always remain true, for no thing to exist: "x is even when for integers (x, n), (2*x - n) is the number of things that exist" "x is a perfect square when, when for integers (x, n), (x*x - n) is the number of things that exist" 9. Much more complex Diophantine equations exist, for example, those which compute any possible computable function, and either have 1 solution if F halts, or 0 solutions when F does not halt. Then it follows that when F is a non-halting program: "(the number of solutions to the equation given F) things exist" 10. Let's say F is a non-halting program which computes the evolution of the wave function for our Hubble volume, let's call this equation our world equation "W". Then it follows that: "(the number of solutions to W) things exist" 11. If 10 is true, that W is a non-halting program. If W is a non-halting program, it means that the execution of W goes on forever. 12. If the execution of W goes on forever, then W computes our apparent universes, including you and me, and other observers who believe in and see "things". Thus the original premise that no thing exists is contradicted. Jason -- 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.
