Sodom <sodom@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
> I will concede that mathematics is the
> best model yet.
I know why mathematics is true -- it's true becuase we *define* it that
way. Everything in math always starts with an assumption -- say, you
assume that T is a normal operator. Then, using that assumption, you prove
something else -- like, there exists a basis for V consisting of
eigenvalues of T -- and you can SAY, ALWAYS AND FOREVER, that any for any
normal operator T, there exists yadda yaddda -- it's proven. Really, all
you have done is create a tautology -- which is actually more useful than
it sounds, in mathematics.
> One other thing, just as an aside, "does infinity exist as
> a real thing?" I know it exists as a concept, but is anything
> infinite in scope?
Sure. How about the number of integers? What is *really* interesting
about infinity, in my opinion, is that some infinities are bigger than
others. Yes, there are an *infinite* number of integers -- but then think
about the *real* numbers! There are an infinite number of them just from 0
to 1; or even from 0 to 0.0001, not to mention all of the others! (the
cardinality of the real numbers is referred to as *uncountably* infinite,
simply because you can't even put the numbers in a countable order!)
As to any *physical* thing being infinite in scope, I don't know. I doubt
it. Since all matter can untimatly be broken down into atoms, it follows
that no peice of matter is beyond our ability to "count", as it were. Even
the universe must have a finite number of atoms, it would just be a big
number. Perhaps the only *real* infinite is "god", which is again another
proof of his non-existence. (or at least his trancendence)
ERiC