Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
Jan
dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Happenstance, like Pi.
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:37:53 GMT, "FromTheRafters" <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Happenstance, like Pi.
I don't believe that.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur. It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before
the beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin,
because time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be is irrelevant for mathematics,
On 04/03/2024 10:33, dgb (David) wrote:
On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:37:53 GMT, "FromTheRafters" <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:I have (and wear) one of these:
dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Happenstance, like Pi.
I don't believe that.
https://www.geeksoutfit.com/products/science-doesnt-care-what-you-believe-t-shirt
On 3/4/24 1:34 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:Not sure about "occur". This may be a philosophical quibble, but I have >always regarded mathematics as a form of language, based primarily on >counting. And yes, humans aren't the only animals capable of that. That >said, if there are things to count and creatures to count them, there
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
Jan
will be numbers. We (humans) are capable of finding interesting kinds
of numbers (irrational, transcendental). So far as I know, there is no
such thing as an "accidental" number.
On 3/4/24 3:51 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:38:14 -0800, the following appeared inThat's it. In particular, the "Golden Ratio" isn't an accident or a
talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com>:
On 3/4/24 1:34 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:I believe his point is the math expresses existing
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:Not sure about "occur". This may be a philosophical quibble, but I have >>> always regarded mathematics as a form of language, based primarily on
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
Jan
counting. And yes, humans aren't the only animals capable of that. That >>> said, if there are things to count and creatures to count them, there
will be numbers. We (humans) are capable of finding interesting kinds
of numbers (irrational, transcendental). So far as I know, there is no
such thing as an "accidental" number.
relationships which existed prior to the invention of math,
just like everything in nature.
design. It's just a definition. Now if there were a universe that
contained nothing, or maybe just one thing, there wouldn't be any math.
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratioOr by design?
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:rdesign?
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratioOr by
It will never be known.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
In my opinion, of course!
On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
:-D
In my opinion, of course!
And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
In my opinion, of course!
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
It hasn't happened at all.
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> writes:
On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
:-D
In my opinion, of course!
And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?
One might ask if a rectange has four sides by accident. How could it be otherwise and still be a rectangle?
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
--In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
dgb (David) explained :
On 7 Mar 2024 at 16:36:07 GMT, "Richmond" <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> writes:
On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
:-D
In my opinion, of course!
And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?
One might ask if a rectange has four sides by accident. How could it be
otherwise and still be a rectangle?
Do you have any idea what this Mark fellow is getting at?
He's two elevenths from getting at being 72288.
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
--reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>
You are, of course, mistaken.
Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>> Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
Off course, always.
On course, otoh...
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
Post arguments, not links,
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >> >>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
Down to the deepest depths of the cave with you.
Go beat the chalk out of a hunderd blackboard erasers for punishment,
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
On 13 Mar 2024 at 12:39:36 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
Off course, always.
On course, otoh...
I was trying to be kind to you. :-(
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
Post arguments, not links,
Is this a case of you having deep pockets and short arms, Jan?
dgb <david@nomale.afraid.org> wrote:
On 13 Mar 2024 at 12:39:36 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>It hasn't happened at all.
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
Off course, always.
On course, otoh...
I was trying to be kind to you. :-(
In my opinion, of course!
Opinions are worthless,
(yours in particular)
Jan
You'd do well to watch and listen here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
Post arguments, not links,
Is this a case of you having deep pockets and short arms, Jan?
Nope, just not allowing you to waste my time.
If there is some cogent argument in there that you want us to know about
you summarise it, and you post it,
It's a message from an exemplary citizen, the holder of an OBE, who spent the last 18 years of his life (which ended 10 days ago) fighting for the benefit of ALL men with Prostate cancer.
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appearedtio
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >>>>
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeIt hasn't happened at all.Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >> >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appearedtio
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >>>>
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeIt hasn't happened at all.Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >> >> >>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared_ra
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
tio
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeOr by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships?
OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:ra
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_
tioOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeIt hasn't happened at all.Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >>>>>>>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the
beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the
beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep
a lower profile than in the past due to work
b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" argument for scientific realism.
On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appearedtio
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeIt hasn't happened at all.Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >>>>>>>>>
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared_ra
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >> >>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
tioOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeOr by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships?
Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
They have nothing to do with any reality at all.
--OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
Still completely irrelevant,
Jan
On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >> a lower profile than in the past due to work
Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?
b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >> argument for scientific realism.
Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. (as he knew it)
As for Wigner,
I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
Could he really bring himself to believe
that "uggly theories are good!"?
Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?
He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
scale. (worse than ever seen before)
We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.
Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
can comfort us with some good words about it,
Jan
With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked.
Or my favorite Pauliism: that's not even wrong!
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared_ra
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com>:
On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
tioOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeOr by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising >contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.
I've seen several of the physical representations; the one I
remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
follow the same pattern.
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared_ra
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com>:
On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
I've seen several of the physical representations; the one ItioOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeOr by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.
remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
follow the same pattern.
More muddled thinking on your part.
But do look it up. You'll find many pictures of nautilus shells,
and many pictures of logarithmic spirals, but very few
of nautilus shells with logarithmic spirals superposed.
(hint, it is only an approximation)
But tp placate your engineering soul: do look up 'nautilus gears'.
If that doesnt convince you that god is a mathematician
nothing will,
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:49:09 +0100, the following appearedden
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
<eastside.erik@gmail.com>:
On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder>:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder>: >> >>>>>>>>>>
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol
_ra
I've seen several of the physical representations; the one ItioOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...
Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, likeOr by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by
accident!
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
all mathematical relationships which describe observed
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
leaving:
"...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
describes such physical relationship."
Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to >> >do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.
remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
follow the same pattern.
More muddled thinking on your part.
But do look it up. You'll find many pictures of nautilus shells,
and many pictures of logarithmic spirals, but very few
of nautilus shells with logarithmic spirals superposed.
(hint, it is only an approximation)
But tp placate your engineering soul: do look up 'nautilus gears'.
If that doesnt convince you that god is a mathematician
nothing will,
No need; you've convinced me that math is irrelevant to
reality, making it the equivalent of navel-gazing.
Have a nice day.
On 3/16/24 1:49 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:21:00 +0100, the following appeared:
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote
te:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wro
den
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol
nt!_ra
tio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accide
Whatever you say, Jan; math has no relationship, descriptiveOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which areWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like >>>>>>>>> all mathematical relationships which describe observed
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
phenomena, is a property of physical
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships?
Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
They have nothing to do with any reality at all.
or otherwise, to reality. Got it.
Good to see that you finally got it.
You may move up one level in the cave,
and forget about beating the chalk out of those blackboard erasers,
Jan
I just went back and read wigner's excellent essay on"Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics", which I'd never read before. I love his
last paragraph
"Let me end on a more cheerful note. The miracle of the appropriateness
of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of
physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our
pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches
of learning."
It's a gift that's tricky. The Lamb shift, the positron were
"predicted" by the math, but to make the electric and magnetic fields of classical electrodynamics symmetrical, we'd need a "magnetron". No such beast. Even without that chimera, time advanced potentials as solutions
are unphysical, but the proposed reasons are uneasy. Particularly
applying this to quantum electrodynamics has (I think) not yet been explained.
On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >>> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >>> a lower profile than in the past due to work
Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?
With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >>> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >>> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >>> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >>> argument for scientific realism.
Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of
mathematics. (as he knew it)
As for Wigner,
I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
Could he really bring himself to believe
that "uggly theories are good!"?
Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?
He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
scale. (worse than ever seen before)
We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.
Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
can comfort us with some good words about it,
Jan
we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked. Or my favorite Pauliism: that's not even wrong!
Mathematical relationships are mathematical. They have nothing to do
with any reality at all.
erik simpson wrote:
On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path,
and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep
a lower profile than in the past due to work
Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?
Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some
features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how
it will be displayed after posting.
On 3/17/24 6:08 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:l
erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/24 1:49 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:21:00 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder):
Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:
On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
<david@nomail.afraid.org>:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder":
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder":
Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:
dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org>
Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go
eden
_ra
tio
Or by design?
It will never be known.
There is nothing to know there,
Jan
The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accid
nt!I just went back and read wigner's excellent essay on"Unreasonable
Whatever you say, Jan; math has no relationship, descriptiveOvergeneralizations and "football scores" aside...Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are >>>>>>>> abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBEWrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like >>>>>>>>>>> all mathematical relationships which describe observed >>>>>>>>>>> phenomena, is a property of physical
It hasn't happened at all.
You are, of course, mistaken.
mathematical
reality, no more. And,
of course, no less.
You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist, >>>>>>>>> incapable of abstraction and idealisation,
PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.
So the integers are a property of your football scores?
"No more, and no less", like you say,
If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
those relationships?
Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
They have nothing to do with any reality at all.
or otherwise, to reality. Got it.
Good to see that you finally got it.
You may move up one level in the cave,
and forget about beating the chalk out of those blackboard erasers,
Jan
Effectiveness of Mathematics", which I'd never read before. I love his
last paragraph
"Let me end on a more cheerful note. The miracle of the appropriateness
of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of
physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We
should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future
research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our
pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches
of learning."
It's a gift that's tricky. The Lamb shift, the positron were
"predicted" by the math, but to make the electric and magnetic fields of >> classical electrodynamics symmetrical, we'd need a "magnetron". No such >> beast. Even without that chimera, time advanced potentials as solutions >> are unphysical, but the proposed reasons are uneasy. Particularly
applying this to quantum electrodynamics has (I think) not yet been
explained.
Wigner wrote at would I would call a 'Lord Kelvin moment'.
As you know, Kelvin wrote at the end of the 19th century
that all problems in physics had been solved,
except for two 'little black clouds on the horizon'.
And indeed, mathematical physics, to which he had contributed so much,
had been succesful beyond expectations.
The 'small black clouds' on Kelvin's horizon
were tackled almost at once, by Planck and Einstein,
with two major scientific revolutions as a result,
and a whole century of new physics.
Wigner likewise stood at such a high point.
Quantum field theory was being unreasonably succesful,
the extraordinary accuracy to ten decimal places or so
hadn't been foreseen by anyone,
and the remaining problems (weak and strong interactions)
looked like they would be wrapped up soon in the same way.
There were only two small black clouds on the horizon...
(quantum gravity and explaining those dimensionless numbers)
Wigner has been less lucky.
The 'black clouds on his horizon' have expanded to fill the whole sky,
they have only grown blacker, and there is no solution in sight.
So we get plenty of books about 'The Crisis in Physics' instead,
Jan
All too true. We've seen the "End of Physics" before, and we've seen
the abyss before. Something always seems to show up that we didn't
expect.
It's turtles all the way down.
erik simpson wrote:
On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:
dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Does this occur by accident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Or by design?
Mathematics doesn't occur.
It is.
If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.
The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
is irrelevant for mathematics,
Jan
a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >>>> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >>>> a lower profile than in the past due to work
Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?
Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting.
With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >>>> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >>>> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his >>>> famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >>>> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >>>> argument for scientific realism.
Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of
mathematics. (as he knew it)
As for Wigner,
I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
Could he really bring himself to believe
that "uggly theories are good!"?
Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?
He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
scale. (worse than ever seen before)
We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.
Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
can comfort us with some good words about it,
Jan
we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked. Or my favorite
Pauliism: that's not even wrong!
Burkhard wrote:[-]
erik simpson wrote:
On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
[hard rewrapped because MacSoup forces that]Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?
Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some
getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting.
OK, so that's not good - looks totally different
before posting, when i forced the first line break
after "some " - so may have to do it manually again,
like this - let's see how this one works
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 376 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 76:10:07 |
Calls: | 8,044 |
Files: | 13,040 |
Messages: | 5,833,960 |