On Aug 9, 2011, at 1:38 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 8/8/2011 9:16 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com
> wrote:
I am getting a bit tired of labouring this point, but honestly your
theory
is postulating something that seems nonsensical to me. Why on earth
would I
believe in the truth of something that *can never be known in any
way*
(namely, that arithmetics is true without / prior to consciousness)?
Ben,
Do you think that the 10^10^100th digit of Pi has a certain value
even though we can never know what it is and no one has ever or
will ever (in this universe at least) be conscious of it? If I
assert the digit happens to be 8, would you agree that my assertion
must be either true or false? If so, where does this truth exist?
Note that one cannot say it has an indefinite or value, or that its
value is inconsequential because that level of precision will never
make a difference in any equation we work with. Euler's identity:
e^(Pi * i) + 1 = 0, would be false without each of the infinite
digits of Pi having a definite and certain value. These values
that are unknown to use, but nonetheless must be there.
Mathematical existence isn't a matter of being "there", it's a
matter of satisfying, making true, a certain proposition. So why
does the putative digit of pi have the value it does, because it
satisfies certain propositions which we infer from other
propositions we are pleased to hold hypothetically true as axioms.
Then what is the ontological status of propositions that are true but
not provable in ones set of hypothetitcally held axioms?
In that case there is something that is true but not reachable through
chains of propositions.
Existence in the usual sense never enters into it.
Do you think our universe is mathematical or magical?
If our universe can be understood mathematically then it is one
example of a mathematical object that has physical existence.
What more evidence would you need to believe mathematical objects exist?
QM shows the existence of perhaps an infinite number of solutions to
the wave function. String theory has nothing in it which rules out
other universes with different physical laws.
Why believe only the math of string theory has been blessed with
phyical existence? You might say because we cannot see those other
universes.
This is not evidence against the theory because the theory explains
why you would not observe them. Occam also fails here, for the
proposition that all possible structures exist has fewer assumptions
than the idea that only these structures exist and no others are
possible.
The fine tuning of the universe confirms to a high probability that
something is wrong with the following proposition:
There is only one set of physical laws with physical existence and
these laws were not intelligently chosen.
So I ask you, where is the error in that statement?
The only way to escape it is to say the idea of fine tuning itself is
flawed, but this is a last ditch attempt to stick to the model of a
single universe. The bulk of evidence points strongly to the idea
that intelligent life would not arise in the majority of possible
structures.
Use baysian analysis to consider the following possibilities:
1. There is one set if laws not intelligently selected.
2. The laws were intelligently selected or there is more than one set
of physical laws.
Since we have evaluated no other evidence at this time, let's assign a
50% chance to each.
Now let's say we determine the probability of any given set of laws
having the right properties for life is one in 100. What would
baysian analysis say of the new probability that proposition 1 is
correct?
Faced with proposition 2, would you be more likely to accept
intelligent design or the existence of other (or all) mathematical
structures?
Mathematical existence isn't sone fuzzy abstract form if existence.
Look around yourself. You are in it.
Jason
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
