On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 3:09 PM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
*> If there were zero objects in the universe then the concept of zero > would necessarily exist to preserve the property of the number of physical > objects in that nothing. If the concept of zero exists then at least 'one' > abstract entity must exist, the one number zero. Now 'two' abstract numbers > exist, 'one' and 'zero'. Et cetera.* You're making the argument that there must be more than just one thing in the universe and therefore it can not consist of infinite unbounded homogeneity, and therefore the universe is not nothing, and therefore the universe is something, and therefore it exists. And that's all very fine but it's irrelevant because your claim was that 2+2=4 would exist even if the universe did not. I maintain it would not. I'm certainly not saying 2+2 =4 has no meaning, I'm saying it has a meaning precisely because the universe exists. I'm saying that physics is more fundamental than mathematics. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> mta -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3Z8zDON%3DxCqr7Nkj_brte-yK_KP99Re5HYLk7ez%2BCOdg%40mail.gmail.com.
