Replying to Avatar Chris Liss

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.
Avatar
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.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
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.

Avatar
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.