[Lloyd Gillespie]

Not really, it just shows your age and inconsistancies...

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Guille

Antonio,

how on earth can mathematics be a prior if it has no a prior existence! It is only rationality, it has no perceptual existence.

The patterns pre-existed and mathematics was the language that translated
these patterns into concrete expression. eg. the daily rotation of earth, 12/24
basis of imperial measure etc.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Tina

The patterns pre-existed and mathematics was the language that translated these patterns into concrete expression

The first person to recognize these patterns will earn the privilege of naming them as in the creation of theorems. The starts of pattern recognition are called conjectures and subsequent valid proofs will raise them to the status of theorems.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

The first person to recognize these patterns will earn the privilege of naming them as in the creation of theorems. The starts of pattern recognition are called conjectures and subsequent valid proofs will raise them to the status of theorems.

But the question is then if the pattern changes eg earth's rotation slows down to 25hrs per rotation can the theorem remain valid apart from physical reality?

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Tina

earth's rotation slows down to 25hrs per rotation

This is just a change in a parametric variable which does not affect the overall general theorem structure. On the other hand theorems never associate with natural constants such as speed of light, constant of gravity, electric charge of electron, Planck's constant of action, etc.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

This is just a change in a parametric variable which does not affect the overall general theorem structure. On the other hand theorems never associate with natural constants such as speed of light, constant of gravity, electric charge of electron, Planck's constant of action, etc.

I think mathematical theorems possess its wide coverage/flexibility and thus really never associate with natural constants.

However, once a mathematical theorem has been applied to physics, that physics theorem might or might not be associated with natural constants.
(unless academicians downgrade those "natural constants associated physics theorems" just as Physics Laws/Theories, no longer honored as Theorems. I don't know about the practise.)

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie

Wrong again, MJA. Absolute equality is absolute injustice... I'll take liberty, thanks...

Can you express this statement for me using logical values?

[Tina]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

Could just be my imagination, but it seems as though that there is a superior position of knowledge taken by yourself, pif.

Isn't the whole point we're here is to discover what reality is and isn't? Once again begging how exactly the "truth" of existence exists.

Sometimes life is like a mirror, but has no function if the eyes are closed.

Re: Mirror analogy

Just because you close your eyes the mirror is still reflecting the images captured in it's field of vision - you just don't see them - so can we not talk about the images (that exist) even with our eyes closed! Eyes closed does not equate to the thing literally disappearing.

[MJA]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie

Wrong again, MJA. Absolute equality is absolute injustice... I'll take liberty, thanks...

Equality is absolute injustice Lloyd?
You can't have liberty or freedom without equality.
Don't you know that?
They are equally one and the same.
It's a good time for Jefferson, don't you think?

=
MJA

PS: Equal is the true foundation of the measure of nature. It is that truth that will set us free!

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by MJA

PS: Equal is the true foundation of the measure of nature. It is that truth that will set us free!

Dear MJA,

At last, you mentioned the term foundation "Equal is the true foundation ..."
Everyone knows that Foundation is important. But Foundation is not All/Whole of the Nature/Knowledge.

Good Intention is surely an important Foundation but not All things resulted from good foundation are Good/Legal. For example, to kill criminals with extra-judicial killings is of good intention and is good to the community, but not in a civilized society!

What I means (perhaps MJA you still don't understand about it) is that:
Oneness is the Foundation. However, up to now, Oneness already progressed/evolved into Many/Multiplex. Just like one big bang at the beginning/foundation already becomes nowadays a complex universe with many real differences. Multiplex has some common/equal essentials in the foundation but no longer all equals. Just like it is too hard to insist that lazy and hardworking persons should be still of equality in their future lives despite they have almost the same foundation.

Therefore, A thinker should not be fixed only on the earliest/true Foundation. To progress with the developments of our universe and human knowledge, a thinker should respect also the high level developments/differences, not just be fixed on Oneness/Simplest.

I don't know why I need to spend time to write the preceding messages that actually most people already know about them so well.
Dear MJA, if you never catch up why so many people oppose your so-called Simple Truth of Equal, it is simply because you don't catch up the simple difference of Foundation between Real World Developments/Differences.

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
...... To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

I haven't read the whole text of Jefferson's Declaration.
Actually, I don't need to read it carefully. It surely has Good Contexts beyond doubts.
The point is: Anyone can quote many good contexts from literatures, but whether those wisdoms can be applied to their personal assertions with their personal interpretations are doubtful.

Best Regards. Bottomlander