Re: Platonism

From: Stephen Harris (cyberguard1048-usenet_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/30/04 

Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 00:59:22 GMT

"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in
message news:41aa8360$19$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net...
> In <320e992a.0411261232.41252e2e@posting.google.com>, on 11/26/2004
> at 12:32 PM, examachine@gmail.com (Eray Ozkural exa) said:
>
>>But unfortunately there can be cases in mathematics that are not even
>>*indirectly* derived from observations, that are solely the result of
>>thought experiments
>
> Gedanken experiements are for Physics.
>
>>and are indeed incompatible even with the basic features of our
>>universe.
>
> I assume that you have faith in that, because it is not the sort of
> claim open to objective verification.
>

Have you read about Super-Turing machines? That seems like
a thought experiment incompatible with the basic features of the
universe or maybe, cannot be implemented, is a better word than
incompatible. This has a bearing on Physics, but I doubt that most
people would classify hypothetical Turing machines as Physics,
the ones that have tapes with infinite or other peculiar powers.