> On 30 Dec 2018, at 08:33, Philip Thrift <cloudver...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Saturday, December 29, 2018 at 5:32:52 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/29/2018 2:44 PM, Philip Thrift wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Saturday, December 29, 2018 at 3:39:25 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 12/29/2018 12:50 PM, Philip Thrift wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Saturday, December 29, 2018 at 11:02:30 AM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 12/29/2018 1:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: 
>>> > I use number because people are more familiar with them. Most people 
>>> > can easily conceived that “17 is odd” is true independently of them, 
>>> > but would have an harder time to conceive that KKK=K independent of 
>>> > them, even if this does not mean much more than the first (left) 
>>> > projection of (K, K) is K. 
>>> 
>>> That's a good example.  People would immediately recognize that KKK=K is 
>>> just a convention.  They are deceived that "17 is odd" is an eternal 
>>> truth independent of human thought because they generalize from their 
>>> experience with physically countable things. 
>>> 
>>> Brent 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I was thinking that if there is a group X of objects of the same mass, if X 
>>> can be split into two groups A and B separated by a distance such that A 
>>> and B pull (gravitate towards) each other equally, then X is even.
>> 
>> Forces are equal and opposite (from conservation of momentum) no matter how 
>> the objects are grouped.
>> 
>> Brent
>> 
>>> (or something like that)
>>> 
>>> So gravity knows even and odd. :)
>>> 
>>> - pt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I thought gravity could tell the difference between even and odd, like there 
>> is no way to separate an odd number of pennies on a balance scale [ 
>> https://www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/balance-scales.html 
>> <https://www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/balance-scales.html> ] and have the 
>> scales be in balance.
> 
> OK.  That's comparing the attraction to a third body (the Earth) not into two 
> groups that gravitate toward each other.
> 
> Brent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, my main point of the example of course:
> 
> There is no "even" or "odd" prior to the existence of matter.

With some act of faith in some notion of matter. No problem with this, unless 
this is used in conjunction with Mechanism.

But there is a problem with this view in the foundations of physics, as 
physicist presuppose numbers in their theories. That works FAPP, but is a 
problem, even without mechanism, in the materialistic ontologies.

Bruno




> 
> - pt 
> 
> -- 
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list 
> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to