Le 06-juil.-07, à 14:53, LauLuna a écrit :
But again, for any set of such 'physiological' axioms there is a
corresponding equivalent set of 'conceptual' axioms. There is all the
same a logical impossibility for us to know the second set is sound.
No consistent (and strong enough) system S
Le 06-juil.-07, à 19:43, Brent Meeker a écrit :
Bruno Marchal wrote:
...
Now all (sufficiently rich) theories/machine can prove their own
Godel's theorem. PA can prove that if PA is consistent then PA cannot
prove its consitency. A somehow weak (compared to ZF) theory like PA
can even
Le 05-juil.-07, à 14:19, Torgny Tholerus wrote:
David Nyman skrev:
You have however drawn our attention to something very interesting and
important IMO. This concerns the necessary entailment of 'existence'.
1. The relation 1+1=2 is always true. It is true in all universes.
Even if a
On Jul 7, 12:59 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le 06-juil.-07, à 14:53, LauLuna a écrit :
But again, for any set of such 'physiological' axioms there is a
corresponding equivalent set of 'conceptual' axioms. There is all the
same a logical impossibility for us to know the
I have never been able to understand how a singularity can be highly
ordered. Is there any room for order in such a tiny thing?
Best
On May 31, 1:51 pm, Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I came across a reference to Boltzmann brains in a recent issue of New
Scientist. The piece,
On 05/07/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For us humans are the universes that contain observers more
interesting. But there is no qualitaive difference between universes
with observers and universes without observers. They all exist in the
same way.
I still disagree, but I
On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 07:56:57AM -0700, LauLuna wrote:
I have never been able to understand how a singularity can be highly
ordered. Is there any room for order in such a tiny thing?
Best
Highly ordered means small entropy. All you need is a small number of
states, so small things
7 matches
Mail list logo
