On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
>>> >>
>>> If “0 things exist” is true, I don’t see how “0 things exist” can exist.
>>
>>
>
> >>
>> If if “0 things exist” is true then “0 things exist” exists,
>
> >
> That does not follow. If the universe is empty, i.e. u = { },
>
The null set is something, my nothing does not contain a set of any sort.
>
> So you agree with Jason that the “nothing theory” is inconsistent?
>
> I am not sure it is inconsistent, but I am sure it is false.
>
So you think "nothing" could be a grammatically correct fictional story
with no plot holes written in the language of mathematics. You could be
right.
*>>> I think we should distinguish well between “being true” and
>>> existence.*
>>
>> >>
>> If there is a difference between “being true” and existence then either:
>>
>> 1) Some things are true but don't exist. In other words some things are
>> logically consistent but are self contained and have nothing to do with
>> physics or physical reality in general.
>>
>
> >
> Assuming Aristotle's theology.
>
Sometimes i have the feeling I'm debating with a chatbot that has been
programmed to throw in the word Aristotle, theology, Plato or Greek at
least once every 250 words.
>>
>> Or in still other words some mathematical stories are fictional and much
>> of modern abstract mathematics has no deeper meaning than a Harry Potter
>> novel and the fanfiction stories that spawn off from it.
>
>
> >
> *That is inconsistent with mechanism,*
>
I see no reason to to think that must be true. You can write a story in the
English language that is grammatical and contains no logical plot holes but
that never happened, why can't the same thing be done in the mathematical
language?
> >
> *but also pretty ridiculous.*
>
I'm just trying to follow the consequences of your statement "we should
distinguish well between “being true” and existence".
> If 1+1 = 2 is fiction, then,
> [...]
>
I didn't say every consistent mathematical statement was fiction! I'm sure
1+2=2 is nonfiction, I'm less sure that Cantor's Theorem on transfinite
sets is. And physics doesn't care if the Continuum hypothesis is true or
not, because all the mathematics that physicists use would remain unchanged
either way.
>**
> *In logic, logicians have tools to delineate precisely the difference
> between truth and existence. Existence os when an existential proposition
> is true,*
>
So logicians have concluded that existence exists when its true that
existence exists?
John K Clark
--
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.
