On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 05:31:33PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 1 Jul 2018, at 19:27, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 6:42 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > But you should not confuse the arithmetical reality with a book, be it > > > virtual or relatively material. > > One of us is very confused that much is certain. You think arithmetical > > reality is the only reality there is > > > > I have never said what I think. That is private. But I can prove that if > mechanism is true, then we cannot assume more than arithmetic (or Turing > equivalent) without being inconsistent.
That is surprising. Why would assuming the existence of real numbers make one inconsistent? Otiose, perhaps, but not inconsistent, surely. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Senior Research Fellow [email protected] Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
