Nostr Web Client

I understand your point, but your analogy is off. You can't make a ruler with that small of length increments because the Planck length is the smallest possible length and it is larger than your hypothetical ruler increments. Reality is in fact quantifiable with distinct units. Pi is not a length, nor is a square root, so how based in reality is math? Perhaps math is merely the realm of the imaginary but following rules of noncontradiction. It is a tool for prediction.

Chris Liss 1y ago

A line is not a physical thing, so the imaginary ruler is not either, so the Planck length limit isn’t really relevant.

Pi is absolutely a number on the line, and the imaginary ruler can’t mark it, no matter how fine its units of measurement.

The analogy is between one degree of infinity, the kind you can get by dividing by ever smaller rational numbers and a higher order kind (real numbers) which represent every point on a line.

The ratio of rationals to reals is zero. The ratio of map to territory is zero. AI to Tao is zero.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Slate 1y ago

Pi is absolutely NOT a number on the line. Please don't create new philosophies while defendjng old ones. Someone needs a math review.

Slate 1y ago

For those of us who forgot what we were supposed to learn in algebra, or apparently never even got past pre-algebra, Pi is a mathematical constant representing the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. It is an irrational number, approximately 3.14159 but goes to ♾️. In geometry, numbers like pi can be **used** to define points on a number line, but pi itself is **not a physical point.**

nostr:nevent1qqsgag8uj44mhu9v9llqkddyl6f2pcyw5rn9sn3qs8hcgl52rps62jqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygr26032xjqck9fus86gck85fegenea5ljxmuduppgqqmn3ujzmhgqpsgqqqqqqs6pexwp

Jack D 1y ago

Okay, so it's an imaginary line, a geometrical line. Those aren't real things, but you are using one as an example of what reality is. Sure, you can't make an imaginary ruler good enough to measure an imaginary line, but you could make a real ruler good enough to measure a real line.

Chris Liss 1y ago

Yes, it’s an analogy. The line is analogous to reality, the ruler is analogous to a map of reality. The ruler is not the line, it can only map certain points on it.

Jack D 1y ago

And I'm suggesting the analogy is bad. A line is continuous. Reality may not be, and in fact there is evidence that it is not.