Mohsen Ravanbakhsh wrote:
> /All actual measurements yield rational values. Using real numbers in
> the equations of physics is probably merely a convenience (since
> calculus is easier than finite differences). There is no evidence that
> defining an instantaneous state requires uncountable information. /
>
> What about the realizability of mathematical concepts. Real numbers are
> mathematical, so they should have a counterpart in real world.
Why? "Mathematical" means nothing but not self-contradictory. Sherlock Holmes stories are mathematical. That doesn't mean Sherlock Holmes exists in some Platonic realm.
Brent Meeker
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Tue Mar 13 2007 - 00:06:01 PDT