Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,895 Year: 4,152/9,624 Month: 1,023/974 Week: 350/286 Day: 6/65 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Objective reality
AnswersInGenitals
Member (Idle past 179 days)
Posts: 673
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 118 of 172 (560207)
05-13-2010 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by New Cat's Eye
05-13-2010 3:29 PM


Pi in the sky may defy popsci.
That the biggest possible circle ever wouldn't allow us to scientifically measure the pi ratio down to the 50th decimal place...
That biggest possible circle wouldn't allow us to measure pi at all since the circumference/diameter of a circle only equals pi in a flat (Euclidian) space, which our universe isn't on a large scale. For example, on the surface of a sphere the largest possible circle has a C/D = 2. Thus, C/D = pi is a very contingent result, i. e., is true of certain realities and not of others.
On the other hand, even if we had never stumbled on the fact that C/D = pi in the locally flat part of the universe we live in we would have still discovered pi, and been able to calculate it to arbitrary precision in other contexts. For example:
1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 - 1/11 + ......... = pi/4.
This is true anywhere in our universe and anywhere in any universe.
...but we can still calculate what it(pi) precisely is shows that not every objective thing can be scientifically investigated.
The precision with which we can calculate (or measure) something has absolutely nothing to do with its ability to be subjected to scientific investigation. Or am I misunderstanding you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-13-2010 3:29 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
AnswersInGenitals
Member (Idle past 179 days)
Posts: 673
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 120 of 172 (560213)
05-13-2010 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by nwr
05-13-2010 6:37 PM


Reality check.
We get the integers by an idealization of counting. It is a method where we start with one and build up combinatorially.
We get the reals from geometry. We think of a line as a continuum, and we divide it up. It isn't obvious that these give rise to the same numbers.
But what if space and time are actually discrete, which they almost certainly are. Then all measurements, if done properly, would yield integer results similar to the way that a mass of real stuff can be stated as an approximate real number denoting weight or a precise integer denoting the precise number of molecules of the stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by nwr, posted 05-13-2010 6:37 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by nwr, posted 05-13-2010 8:13 PM AnswersInGenitals has not replied
 Message 124 by cavediver, posted 05-14-2010 3:50 AM AnswersInGenitals has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024