On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:11 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 1/8/2014 5:20 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:
Dear Brent,
I agree with you 100%! But that seems to imply that there is something
real about the physical. I think that we can obtain a form of realism
that does not
Dear Brent,
I have given my definition of reality previously, but here it is again.
For some collection of observers that can communicate, a reality is that
which is incontrovertible. In other words, a reality is that which all
observers agree. I do not like the idea of an a priori reality as
Max's main lacuna is the nature of consciousness, which he describes as
what data feels like when it's being processed - hardly a detailed
theory. He starts his Mathematical Universe Hypothesis from the opposite
pole to Bruno, so to speak. I wonder if it's possible for a particular
mathemathical
Most theories of everything (TOEs) like string theory are based on physics.
But there are as well TOEs based on mathematics being fundamental to a
physical reality based on science. In particular, one math-TOE is based on
the discrete natural numbers famously used by Godel to derive his
601 - 604 of 604 matches
Mail list logo
