Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:37:55 +0200

Of course, Torgny stops, in the UD Argument, at step 0. He disbelieves
"classical computationalism".

The "yes doctor" is made senseless; because "he is a zombie", and
Church thesis becomes senseless, because he is ultrafinitist, and
Church thesis concerns functions from N to N, or from N to 2, and NXN
to N, ... It concerns those computable and non computable objects. N=
{0, 1, 2, 3, ...}.

But yes, we need N, and its structure (N,+,x). We cannot prove that N
exists. But we can postulate its existence, give it a recursive name,
and generate and develop more and more simple and powerful theories
about it and its structure. Usual math use N, and its images all the
times. Only a philosopher can be paid to doubt N. A good thing!

Without N, no universal machine, no universal person.

And no Mandelbrot Set M is available for an ultrafinitist, given the
bijection between N and the little Mandelbrots (those the M set is
made of!).

Here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l9N5a0nxuQ&feature=channel
A beautiful illustration that the M set summarizes its "histories", 02
times, 04 times, 08 times 16 times, 32 times ... around its little
Mandelbrot sets, (or around its histories ...). In the zoom here, a
feature of the history is "going near the tail of a little Mandelbrot
set", and both the music and image coloring (different in the zoom in
and the zoom out) illustrates that "Hopf bifurcation" where the
neighborhoods are multiplied by two, iteratively, and with an
accelerating frequence, so that the limit (of 2^n) gives a little
mandelbrot set (or ...).

Bruno



On 10 Jun 2009, at 18:24, Bruno Marchal wrote:

>
>
> On 10 Jun 2009, at 02:20, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> So we believe in the consistency of Peano's arithmetic because we
>> have a
>> physical model.
>
> Why physical? And do we have a physical model? I would say we belive
> in the consistency (and soundness) of PA because we have a model of
> PA, the well known structure (N, 0, +, *).
>
> If comp is true, there is no physical model at all. (But this is not
> something on which I want to insist for now).
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>
> >

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Jun 10 2009 - 20:37:55 PDT

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