From: Marc Geddes (marc_geddes@yahoo.co.nz)
Date: Sat Aug 14 2004 - 04:21:31 MDT
> I am quite sure you understand that consistency and
> coherence are not
> sufficient to make such a system actually true.
> Any logical system
> is only as strong as its foundation. This is why I
> harped on putting
> something as questionalbe as "reality is a
> manifesation of
> mathematics" at the foundation. If the foundation
> is shaky then it
> does not matter how strong the interconnections and
> building on top of
> it are. It will still fall down. You don't
> actually require this to
> build your structure. What you require is what
> suggests this notion
> to you and others.
Samantha, reasoning does not have to be hierarchical.
Popper's scientific method which was extended by
Bartley into Pan-Critical Rationalism is much broader
than just axiomatic reasoning.
See Max More's very good article on this for instance:
http://www.maxmore.com/pcr.htm
>
> BTW, the Universal Turing machine does not in the
> least "suggest that
> all of reality is entirely computational" in the
> sense you are
> reaching for.
>
> More later if I feel inclined to wade into this.
Here is what I said:
"But since the entire physical world is described by
mathematical equations, Turing's conception of a
'Universal Turing Machine' (the general purpose
computer) suggests that all of reality is entirely
computational, in the sense that any finite part of
reality can be simulated by a general purpose
computer."
Please tell me why I am wrong.
=====
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
- Gen. John Stark
"The Universe...or nothing!"
-H.G.Wells
Please visit my web-sites.
Science-Fiction and Fantasy: http://www.prometheuscrack.com
Science, A.I, Maths : http://www.riemannai.org
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:43 MST