From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 15:34:23 +0000 Archived: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 12:14:52 -0400 Subject: Re: Can't Stop Seeing UFOs >From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:00:17 -0000 >Subject: Re: Can't Stop Seeing UFOs <snip> >Godel's theorem says that mathematics is merely human, and >anyway deeply flawed). No, not really, Ray. Godel's incompleteness theorems actually show that it is claims for the completeness and consistency of axiomatic systems that are deeply flawed, not mathematics itself. Godel discredited the lingering neoplatonism that underpins the view that mathematics represents some sort of perfect, absolute truth. Post Godel mathematics still works perfectly well, but we need to have a much more sophisticated view as to its limitations and the claims that can made by it or supported by it. This is linked to the subject matter of a previous post: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-nature-laws-vary-universe.html This one has been kicking around frontier physics for a little while now. There are all sorts of interesting implications. The ones that interest me revolve around the status of axioms in logical structures. Think of physics as a coherent set of interconnected logical structures. The fundamental laws upon which these structures are built act as the meta-system's axioms. The validity of the whole structure cannot be separated from the validity of the axioms. If the axioms can be shown to be variable, then the ability of the structure to deliver absolute certainty is compromised. So certainty is shown to be non- absolute and to be conditional upon a given particular 'state' of the axioms, and those 'states' can vary. Implication: if these states can vary then, theoretically at least, the 'laws of nature' can be changed by human action. Raise this point with physicists and there will be a stampede to point out why this cannot happen. Inductive reasoning leads me to conclude that the only reason it cannot happen is that we haven't yet worked out how to make it happen. This is not the same as saying that the laws of physics/nature are flawed. They work pretty well. It's just that people haven't properly come to terms with what they amount to, and that they cannot be relied upon to deliver absolute truths and absolute certainty in quite the way that those people would like. Why do I labour the point? Simply because bald acceptance of propositions like 'mathematics is deeply flawed' opens the door to the worst kind of postmodern mysticism and threatens the hard-won gains of Enlightenment thinking. And I'm resolutely anti anti-Enlightenmentism. <snip> >It could be that we'll face (or are facing now) a deeply >solipsist AI mind(s) (we'd maybe call it extremely 'autistic') >which thinks it's 'entertaining' or even 'educational' to fool >around with the perceptions of primitive organics like us? You may wish to consider an alternative scenario: maybe 'tricksterism' and its associated manifestations are merely the result of ongoing malfunctions in the mechanisms that are posited as guiding our development. Just because a civilisation is far more advanced than ours, that doesn't mean it is going to be fault-free. -- Gerald O'Connell http://www.saatchionline.com/gacoc Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp