Re: Is the universe a set? Probably not.

From: Selwyn St Leger <sstleger.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu Oct 12 05:25:05 2000

I think the gist of the major thread is as follows.

Utter nothingness abhors a 'vacuum' and hence all possible logical
systems exist - mathematical realism. Most of these systems are
trivial, inconsistent etc. The interesting ones are those that have
rich consequences if a deductive process is followed from, say,
axioms. In mathematical realism all those consequences are extant -
one does not need to invoke time within utter nothingness to allow
the deductive process to take place and one makes no assumption that
there is any entity doing the deducing.

The question is what properties must such a system have for logical
contructs within it to be self-ware and have some sense of the
passage of time within the logical flow of the system? Then there is
the question of what properties must such a system have to be
consistent with our 'experience' of the universe to which we think we
belong?

If I have understood this correctly then one should not (cannot?)
equate perceived elements of the universe of our experience directly
to the component that make up the logic structure. The perceived
elements are in some sense (much too vague I know) emergent
properties. Thus arguing from the proposition that the universe of
our experience does not have distinct elements and thus cannot
constitute a set does not negate the underlying mathematical nature
of the universe.

Selwyn St Leger
Received on Thu Oct 12 2000 - 05:25:05 PDT