Infinity…… Infinite? Or Finite?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Aristotle would say that we must acquire the knowledge of the operations within the "Universal" set by observing the permutations -an unending process.

Socrates would say that it may be revealed to us in the form of a function (Z=Z^2+C).

Do you agree?

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

First of all I must conceed to your deep understanding of these issues.

I agree but I do not agree at the same time, I guess that's a violation of Aristotle's law of the excluded middle... P V NP

How do we know that what we have at hand (the fractal set in your example) is truth revealing itself or just creations of our minds?

At the same time, how can we be sure of what we are observing to be the true are reflections of reality and not our own projection, or simply idea, of it?

What is really missing, the broken Link, is Verification and Validation in an objective sense. That can not be accomplished in my view within our System. It calls for independent and unbiased observations, which may be difficult (to say the least) to obtain.

Of course, some will claim that experimental verification is the answer, but that's limited by our constraint physical reality.

Maybe the key is the discovery of Universal Logic or the Mechanism that truth Reveals itself. Metaphysical issue, I do not know...

quote:
___________________________________________________________________________
Maybe the key is the discovery of Universal Logic or the Mechanism that truth Reveals itself. Metaphysical issue, I do not know...
___________________________________________________________________________
I give ascent to this idea.

We are face with an "ultimatum," so to speak; one of two options.

1. Our individual intellects do not reflect the operatons of the Universe, and we are therefore doomed to impotence in our relation to the Universe.

2. Our individual intellects do, in fact, reflect the operations of the Universe, and we are therefore guaranteed a harmonious, limitless, unrestrained freedom to act within such a Universe, restrained only by the fitler that intervenes [ie. the "subjective;" personal disharmonies with the external Universe].

A third option:

We exploit our nature and divert our intellect to useless and meaningless activities, and doing so, we keep on losing our links to Universal Truth. A somewhat phenomenological view with a touch of Existentialism but very far from Logival Positivism and Pragmatism...

I could be accused that this is a subject of Ethics, which is not considered by contemporary Philosophers to be a legitimate subject of Philosophy. However, I do beleive that the separation of Philosophy and Ethics contributed greatly to the Allienation of Mankind and its draw into dark paths of knowledge. No religious underpinings into this.

quote:
_____________________________________________________________________________
We exploit our nature and divert our intellect to useless and meaningless activities, and doing so, we keep on losing our links to Universal Truth.
_____________________________________________________________________________
That would appears to be so (ie. The "filter" contained in ultimatum #2. above).

I might propose that if a UFT (Unified Field Theory), or any other "all-encompasssing equation" were to emerge in our scientific thought, it would only be useful to us as humans insofar as it allowed us to be harmonious with our surrounding Universe, and with other personal entities.

As Aristotle asserted, a violation of the laws of the Universe result in an indifference in human conduct. Enter ... "Ethics?"

Our personal disharmonies with the Universe conceivably exist on scales, meaurable and immeasurable; beyond the quantum computations and quibits of brains.

... but I must apologize to TVF if a forum dedicated to physics and astronomy appears to have been hijacked by these ideas, which will not be able to be developed fully here in measurable ways.

But unavoidable is the notion that "information" is fundamental to the physics of the Universe.

Without holding PhDs in all sciences, and without a new scholastic discipline, such as "inder-disciplinary studies," the only place to go from here is in places like these forums.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I might propose that if a UFT (Unified Field Theory), or any other "all-encompasssing equation" were to emerge in our scientific thought, it would only be useful to us as humans insofar as it allowed us to be harmonious with our surrounding Universe, and with other personal entities.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In fear of TVF shutting us down for trying to exceed our own capability of intelectualizing issues <img src=icon_smile.gif border=0 align=middle>, I submit my conclusion:

A UFT will not suffice is it deals only with the effects and not the causes. Unless it is enhanced or synchronized with a progress in Human values, it may contribute to further exploitation and unleashing of powers that will threaten our very own existence.

I have to also say that most of current and past Religious schmemes and systems have greatly contributed to the detriment, in my view.

Thanks for the enlightning discussion Jim.

Makis, thanks for the engaging discussion; very enjoyable.

Regarding the forum, perhaps overdue; the original posting,
quote:
___________________________________________________________________________
If there were a beginning point would that point also serve as the end making what appeared to be infinite now finite?
___________________________________________________________________________
Clarify "end" as "terminus;" sematically either "beginning" or "end."

Infinite, "non terminus;" begining point 'zero,' "terminus."

The terms "terminus" and "non terminus," are incongruenous at the most basic level.

The correlation will never be measurable, demonstrable, or observable.

May I propose the end of this forum?