On Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 6:52:41 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 5:58:17 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1 Mar 2019, at 19:32, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reading all the above in the context of 
>>>
>>> *Naturalness and Emergence*
>>> David Wallace
>>> February 20, 2019
>>> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/15757/1/naturalness_emergence.pdf
>>>
>>> leads to the conclusion that *our current language(s) of physics 
>>> is(are) most likely wrong.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A proposition can be wrong. I am not sure what you or Wallace would mean 
>>> by a language being wrong. Perhaps Wallace meant that our metaphysics (most 
>>> of the time the materialist one) is wrong, which makes more sense. Perhaps 
>>> he does not dare to say so. It is not well seen in some circles.
>>>
>>> Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> By 'language' in the above paper he means 'mathematical language' and he 
>> means precisely the language in which QFT an GR are actually written in 
>> (seen when you look at them on paper or on a screen): Sentences are made of 
>> mathematical symbols and variables, but the basics begin with a selection 
>> of sentences (axioms) from which a theory is made. 
>>
>>
>> OK. Thanks. That makes more sense.
>>
>>
>>
>> So he is really saying the axioms are likely wrong, and even new 
>> primitives (mathematical symbols) may have to be invented.
>>
>>
>> Of course, I don’t think so. It is phenomenologically true, but for the 
>> ontology, i.e. the minimal amount of things which needs to be assumed, s, 
>> 0, + and x are enough (added to logic). In fact, S and K, with “(“ and “)”, 
>> plus “=“ are enough, even without logic. (I always assume Mechanism, by 
>> default, to be sure).
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Here's an example David Wallace presents (as an "outlandish" possibility): 
> Suppose in *pi *(which is computable, so has a *program* (a spigot one, 
> in fact) that produces its digits. Suppose somewhere in that stream of 
> digits is the Standard Model Equation
>
>     (say written in LaTeX/Math [ Unicode ] but rendered here)
>      
> https://www.sciencealert.com/images/Screen_Shot_2016-08-03_at_3.20.12_pm.png
>
> So what could this mean? (He sort of leaves it hanging.)
>
> - pt
>


Apropos Dilbert cartoon:

            https://dilbert.com/strip/2019-03-03

- 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.
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