Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> Le 09-mai-07, à 09:08, marc.geddes.domain.name.hidden a écrit :
>
>> Of course reality doesn't change. The question of map versus
>> territory is *not* an all or nothing
>> question. *sometimes* the map equals the territory. Most of the time
>> it does not.
>
>
> This is an important point where I agree with Marc. With or without
> comp the necessity of distinguishing the map and the territory cannot
> be uniform, there are "meaning"-fixed-point, like when a map is
> embedded continuously in the territory (assuming some topology in the
> map and in the territory, this follows by a fixed point theorem by
> Brouwer, which today admits many interesting computational
> interpretations.
>
> Bruno
I don't think you can define a topology on "meaning" that will allow the fixed point theorem to apply.
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 Wed May 09 2007 - 12:50:52 PDT