Name: Anonymous 2010-09-05 18:03
mathematical universe ftw. FTW!
At the big bang, as the universe divides into more and
more parts, a naturally-occurring number sequence is the inevitable result. The 'bits of universe' are at the fundamental level naturally-occurring quantum numbers, and behave and interact according to a natural maths which gets more and more complex as the sequence continues.
Human number and maths classifies differences within sets within a meta-set, and the relationships and interactions of the differences. But haven't physicists and mathematicians anthropomorphised maths and numbers, so that they're seen as human constructs? Early pysics is about increasing numbers of differences within the single 'set' universe, as it divides and divides and divides (looking like expansion from the point of view of something WITHIN the set).
A number sequence began at the big bang and it will only behave according to a natural maths, becoming increasingly complex in potential and reality as the number of points in the sequence increases and increases over time. I mean, I know it's a tin hat idea, but shouldn't it be looked at the other way round from the current perspective - it isn't that human number theory and maths is surprisingly suited to describing physics... but that physics is the extension of a naturally occurring maths, which is the ONLY way a set being constantly analysed into more and
more bits-of-set will work?
It does my nut in that usually rational, logic bound anticreationist mathematicians and physicists will suddenly get a burst of faith when the almighty (pun intended) coincidence of the maths/physics overlap is raised. (I'm not a creationist by the way, I believe in the maths!). It makes way more sense that a natural maths flows from the big bang, and when it has enough 'different bits of universe' (naturally-occurring numbers) the maths leads to the physics.
At the big bang, as the universe divides into more and
more parts, a naturally-occurring number sequence is the inevitable result. The 'bits of universe' are at the fundamental level naturally-occurring quantum numbers, and behave and interact according to a natural maths which gets more and more complex as the sequence continues.
Human number and maths classifies differences within sets within a meta-set, and the relationships and interactions of the differences. But haven't physicists and mathematicians anthropomorphised maths and numbers, so that they're seen as human constructs? Early pysics is about increasing numbers of differences within the single 'set' universe, as it divides and divides and divides (looking like expansion from the point of view of something WITHIN the set).
A number sequence began at the big bang and it will only behave according to a natural maths, becoming increasingly complex in potential and reality as the number of points in the sequence increases and increases over time. I mean, I know it's a tin hat idea, but shouldn't it be looked at the other way round from the current perspective - it isn't that human number theory and maths is surprisingly suited to describing physics... but that physics is the extension of a naturally occurring maths, which is the ONLY way a set being constantly analysed into more and
more bits-of-set will work?
It does my nut in that usually rational, logic bound anticreationist mathematicians and physicists will suddenly get a burst of faith when the almighty (pun intended) coincidence of the maths/physics overlap is raised. (I'm not a creationist by the way, I believe in the maths!). It makes way more sense that a natural maths flows from the big bang, and when it has enough 'different bits of universe' (naturally-occurring numbers) the maths leads to the physics.