Web Images Maps News Orkut Groups Gmail more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Why numbers?
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  5 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
V.Gopal  
View profile  
 More options Nov 9 2002, 6:16 am
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: vgopa...@rediffmail.com (V.Gopal)
Date: 8 Nov 2002 16:46:46 -0800
Local: Sat, Nov 9 2002 6:16 am
Subject: Re: Why numbers?
mplu...@wpi.edu (M Plumer) wrote in message <news:580c8f26.0211071906.455ba9e7@posting.google.com>...
> I have a serious fundamental brain fart. Why are quantities the basis
> of math and thus science and thus all knowledge? This may be touching
> upon one of the key inquiries of modern thought. I hope not. What is
> it about quantities that make them so representative of the universe?
> Forget it. This question is unanswerable. It is too deep. I don't
> know. I am so confused.

Numbers are key to nature otherwise no prediction would be possible.
But everything in nature is not simply 'quantity', each 'quantity'
has a quality. 'Quality' is relative and we cannot use it in any
calculation. Both 'quantity' and 'quality' are continuous variables.
In nature reality is a product of quantity and quality, and, reality
is a single 'expression' of God. A single  word, or number or figure  
in the positive communicable language cannot carry/communicate both
quantity and quality at the same time. Reality in nature undergoes
change but the symbolic representative of the reality on paper does
not undergo change on paper. What all these things indicate is that  
even a seemingly harmless desire to communicate knowledge would compel
us to project a world-view in which nothing causes any change and
nothing undergoes any change and all changes are reversible - we can
put every process of change in the reverse gear at the same cost!
Predictability and our ability to repreoduce effects prove that God
cannot perform miracles. Is there anybody who is willing to seek the
truth unconditionally even when its attainment would entail heavy
sacrifices in toil and happiness, simply to prove that the nature is
the source of wisdom, with no other advantage? I donot think so.

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Moufang Loop  
View profile  
 More options Nov 10 2002, 1:27 am
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: Moufang Loop <Moufang.L...@btinternet.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:56:48 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sun, Nov 10 2002 1:26 am
Subject: Re: Why numbers?

"V.Gopal" wrote:

> mplu...@wpi.edu (M Plumer) wrote in message <news:580c8f26.0211071906.455ba9e7@posting.google.com>...
> > I have a serious fundamental brain fart. Why are quantities the basis
> > of math and thus science and thus all knowledge? This may be touching
> > upon one of the key inquiries of modern thought. I hope not. What is
> > it about quantities that make them so representative of the universe?
> > Forget it. This question is unanswerable. It is too deep. I don't
> > know. I am so confused.
> Numbers are key to nature otherwise no prediction would be possible.

But prediction _isn't_ possible.

ML


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Ms O. Philia  
View profile  
 More options Nov 16 2002, 12:35 pm
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: "Ms O. Philia" <BrainPolice...@bigfoot.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:11:45 +0900
Local: Sat, Nov 16 2002 12:41 pm
Subject: Re: Why numbers?

"Moufang Loop" <Moufang.L...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "V.Gopal" wrote:
> > Numbers are key to nature otherwise no prediction would be possible.

> But prediction _isn't_ possible.

> ML

From the standpoint of  Laplacian determinism,  that the instantaneous state
of the universe at any time uniquely determines its state at any other time,
the holoverse at each time quantum makes a 100% accurate prediction of the
following quantum's state (and indeed all quanta's states!) . . .

As for "Why numbers?" Well, mathematicians do it by the numbers because it's
more fun that way. ;-)


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Mark  
View profile  
 More options Nov 28 2002, 10:54 pm
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: whopk...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Date: 28 Nov 2002 17:24:29 GMT
Local: Thurs, Nov 28 2002 10:54 pm
Subject: Re: Why numbers?
"Ms O. Philia" <BrainPolice...@bigfoot.com> writes:

>From the standpoint of  Laplacian determinism,  that the instantaneous state
>of the universe at any time uniquely determines its state at any other time,

One might, however, reasonably surmise that no state ever occurs twice in
actuality so the uniqueness of the state that actually follows a given state
is automatically true.

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Ms O. Philia  
View profile  
 More options Nov 29 2002, 1:26 am
Newsgroups: sci.math, sci.physics, sci.logic
From: "Ms O. Philia" <BrainPolice...@bigfoot.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 04:56:47 +0900
Local: Fri, Nov 29 2002 1:26 am
Subject: Re: Why numbers?
"Mark" <whopk...@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message

news:as5jgd$es$1@uwm.edu...

> One might, however, reasonably surmise that no state ever occurs twice in
> actuality so the uniqueness of the state that actually follows a given
state
> is automatically true.

    Or maybe not? See Process Physics: Modelling Reality as Self-Organising
Information - Reginald T. Cahill, Christopher M. Klinger and Kirsty Kitto
(http://www.scieng.flinders.edu.au/cpes/people/cahill_r/processphysics...
23.pdf) "There are additional Quantum State Diffusion (QSD) terms which are
non-linear and stochastic; these QSD terms are ultimately responsible for
the emergence of classicality via an objectification process, but in
particular they produce wave-function(al) collapses during quantum
measurements; a mechanism that eluded quantum theory since its discovery and
which is finally seen to have its explanation with Geodel's incompleteness
theorem and its associated Self Referential Noise within a process-system.
The random click of the detector is then a manifestation of Geodel's
profound insight that truth has no finite description in self-referential
systems; the click is simply a random contingent truth. The SRN is thus seen
to be a major missing component of the modelling of reality. In the above we
have a deterministic and unitary evolution, tracking and preserving
topologically encoded information, together with the stochastic QSD terms,
whose form protects that information during localisation events, and which
also ensures the full matching in Quantum Homotopic Field Theory of process
time to real time: an ordering of events, an intrinsic direction or `arrow'
of time and a modelling of the contingent present moment effect."

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google