Comments on Gratuitous Literary Fragment #143 (fragments of Reality)

Fred le marin (2012-07-22T13:01:02Z)

Still with Newton, but around the Galaxy…

I've just read (again) some fragments of your description relative to "The Truth(tm)".

In particular, any respectable logician should not talk about "Absolute Truth" but only "Provability". [Yes, I'm copying this right away and from your own work].
Indeed, there is no "concrete set" in Nature (except |N, of course [half a joke]).

So, all we can do is to infer (thanks to (countable ?) axioms and formalism…) what we DO mean by a "set" [and also what it should NOT be].

ZF(C) set theory : fragments of Truth about sets ? Non-standard sets somewhere ?
"Do vampires dislike (oct)onions as much as garlic ?"
"Is God the Good Lord ?" or "Is there a God (with a visible-shinning-face-not-killing-men-when-they-look-at-Him) ?"
(by the way, let us disclose that Newton was sceptic about the Trinity)

I end up with a cool reference: <URL:> : I'll keep on thinking about it !

Fred le marin (2012-07-04T19:39:51Z)

The Ocean of Truth and the Ocean of Reality.

Mathematics (like 'fluxions' for instance) are mostly inspired by what we call 'reality'.
Physics (like 'this quantity derives from a scalar potential') make us believe that there are (rather simple) laws of Nature.
Yet, I can't understand anything about the whole story : people come, people go…
Furthermore, the last sentences are (freely copied) from Sir Isaac Newton (himself).
Great Darkness in the Depths : breathe brother !

You can post a comment using the following fields:
Name or nick (mandatory):
Web site URL (optional):
Email address (optional, will not appear):
Identifier phrase (optional, see below):
Attempt to remember the values above?
The comment itself (mandatory):

Optional message for moderator (hidden to others):

Spam protection: please enter below the following signs in reverse order: ef7c17

Recent comments