Re: Evidence for the simulation argument

From: John M <>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:37:33 -0400

I looked at your paper, interesting.
One question:
what do you mean by "exist"
(Notably: "does NOT exist)?

We think about it (no matter in how vague terms and weak understanding), we talk about it, our mind has a place in our thinking for that term, - does this not suffice for (in a WIDER??? meaning) existence?
I agree: it is logically (physically?) hardly identifiable but do we stand only on a (material?) physical basis?
And I make no difference between infinite small and infinite big. None of them understandable. Brent's 'infinitesimal' is a good idea in this topic, yet I consider it scale-oriented, an infinitesimally close in 1000 orders of magnitude smaller scale can be 'miles' away. (No 'real' miles implied) -

Best regards

John M
----- Original Message -----
  From: Torgny Tholerus
  Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:58 AM
  Subject: Re: Evidence for the simulation argument

    Le 14-mars-07, à 08:51, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : (among others)

      Infinity is a logically impossible concept. Infinity Does Not Exist.
      Torgny Tholerus

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Thu Mar 15 2007 - 15:49:29 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:13 PST