Re: Reality Oriented Logic -- Discussion

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

SB = Sean Barker
PH = Pat Hayes

Re: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2007-08/msg00269.html
CC: Arisbe List, Inquiry List, Ontolog Forum, Semantic Web List

SB, addressing PH:

SB: You evidently have not done a course in geometry where every
    theorem starts with the assumption "if 2 not-equal-to 0".
    This leaves mathematicians permanently scared [scarred?]
    with the idea that pure mathematics is a formal system
    independent of reality -- "a game played this way" if
    you like -- and it is the job of applied mathematicians
    to identify the formal apparatus that can be used to
    model some aspects of reality. This is not to say
    that the mathematics cannot apply to reality,
    but rather that it is sometimes tricky to
    work out which parts it applies to.

SB: Perhaps the question keeps arising because there is
    a fundamental difference in assumptions/perceptions
    between the different religions of mathematics and
    logic (to wander into another thread)?

Sean,

Funny you should mention it, because I happen to have spent the
last quarter century working in a branch of geometry where 2 = 0,
and it has a lot to do with the "ecclesiastical rapprochement" of
logic and mathematics.

Vide: http://www.centiare.com/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems
What I am calling "Differential Logic" here is in many respects just
Differential Geometry in Characteristic 2.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
¢iare: http://www.centiare.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey
zhongwen wp: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
http://www.altheim.com/ceryle/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JonAwbrey
wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=398
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Received on Friday, 10 August 2007 13:28:51 UTC