So how about absolute zero? G
On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well, I'm relieved to learn that i'm not old enough to be your > father. But my sceptical brain doesn't accept absolutes. I consider > logic a human invention. We'll just have to disagree. > Paul > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> You may be old enough to be my father (my mother is in her >> 80s ... ;-) but what you are saying here is simply incorrect. >> >> Assigning symbolic values to things is not mathematics. It is a basic >> capability of the human brain also expressed in language and does not >> depend upon logic. Mathematics depends upon logic. >> >> Godfrey >> >> >> On Oct 27, 2006, at 11:35 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> Of course mathematics is based on observation. It's a method of >>> assigning values to our environment that we perceive as logical. >>> The truth of mathematics is only provable, because the logic is >>> itself based on observation. When the first cavement decided to >>> count the trees in his yard, he was assigning values to things he >>> observed. He created a logic of his own. It's not intrinsic, >>> although it may seem so now. However, this kind of discussion is >>> pointless. it all depends on whether or not one believes that >>> humans are capable of observing the universe as it truly exists. I >>> accept the logic of science as a convenience, but I leave room for >>> doubt. >>> Paul >>> Who, unfortunately, is not a laddie and is probably old enough to >>> be your father:-) >>> -------------- Original message ---------------------- >>> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on >>>> observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical >>>> concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof >>>> itself. >>>> >>>> Mathematics is the study of provable truth using logic, which >>>> provides a structure for science (the aggregation of predictive >>>> knowledge through hypothesis and observation) to work with, not the >>>> reverse. Mathematics also provides a structure for the >>>> development of >>>> codes. >>>> >>>> What I think you are mistaking here is the expression of >>>> Mathematical >>>> constructs. This is a language or possibly several languages, not a >>>> code. >>>> >>>> Godfrey >>>> >>>> PS: >>>> ... >>>> PMDL == Pentax Mathematics Discussion List >>>> PPDL == Pentax Pun Discussion List >>>> ... >>>> >>>> On Oct 27, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>> >>>>> ... I'm frequently amused by the scientists and secular >>>>> humanists who describe what they think they see using a code they >>>>> call >>>>> mathematics. Of course since that code is based on what they have >>>>> observed it fits this little circular universe perfectly. This of >>>>> course proves to the weak minded that what they observe is indeed >>>>> real. >>>>> Doubt is the precursor to real knowledge. Arrogance is self >>>>> defeating. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
