X-Message-Number: 15018
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 13:09:51 +0000
From: "Joseph Kehoe" <>

>> Can anyone name a process that  cannot be modelled by some math equation?

>The thought process :-)


But my point was that we can model the basic building blocks of the universe and
their interactions.  We are made of those so what is to stop us modeling us? 
Granted we do not have the ability to do so yet but I can think of nothing that 
makes it impossible, just a matter of refining our present models.

>>One could argue that the entire universe is based on math and logic. Can
>>anyone name a process that  cannot be modelled by some math equation?

>If you mean *we* "base" *our* understanding of the universe on math, then
>we have no disagreement, and one need not read further.  If you mean there
>is some math the universe uses, then we disagree, and here is why I would

Badly stated by me, of course I meant to say we base our understanding of the 
universe on math or for the present discussion we model it (very successfully so
far) with math.

As to what the Universe actually is ...

The Universe being physical, depends how you define physical and I am not sure 
that we can with using some circular definition.

There are of course semi-mystical interpretations - the universe is thought (the
observer problem in quantum theories) - it only exists because we see it.

All that is very much open to individual interpretation and hard to argue for or
against rationally.

>There are many things a math equation cannot tell you:

>1.	What a cup of coffee tastes like.
>2.	What it feels like to be in love.
>3.	What if feels like to be consciousness.
>4.	What if feels like to be self-aware.
>5.	What is art, in the absolute sense.
>6.	What is absolute beauty.
>7.	What is absolute morality.
(do they even exist?)
I retreat on these

They are all individual experiences. If you said what causes the"in love" 
feeling and what are its effects then give it 10 years and we will be close to 
the answer from the chemical and physical states of the brain.
Sim. for q 3,4

1. We will soon be close to understanding the taste chemistry reactions so 1 is 
not that bad.

5,6,7 will fall out of 3,4 but for each person it will be different based on our
initial states.

>8.	What is absolute space without regard to relative bodies.
>9.	What is absolute time (or even if it exists?).

Math may provide an answer to these using superstring theory or the like, the 
are probably nearer answers than the above questions.

>10.	The statement: "This statement is a lie."

Depends on what or basic logic is. We can use a truth theoretic model that uses 
limits. If the statement converges to TRUE or FALSE then it is that but if it 
does no converge to either (like the above statement) then it is indeterminate 
which is the correct answer.

We can also use three valued logic (True,False,Unknown). It does not seem right 
in two valued logic but we only use that because of historical president. There 
are other more advanced logical theories that are supersets of the plain old two
valued one and which work much better.

Again it is always possible we will reach a limit to our knowledge and stop but 
it seems unlikely.

Joseph Kehoe, MSc
Raven Internet Technologies Ltd.
ph: +353 503 52450

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15018