So I can use the words without really knowing what they mean. But presumably others like Goedel and Chaitin know math better than words. Their problem is then to translate their research into terms that we can understand, and perhaps even that they can understand.

I am struck by the example of quantum mechanics in this regard. Many people know how to use it, but nobody seems to know what it means. Chaitin is wont to attach meaning to his work, more so than Goedel; and we should always be suspicious when mwening is attached, for it involves extra assumptions that may not be true. I offer the many concurrent universe explanation of quantum mechanics as one example of trying to attach meaning to the naked results. If the naked equations work, we should refrain from dressing them with cosmic meaning.

• I know language.... - petersand - September 5, 2001 - 17:59 UTC
  • Thank you - yanniru - September 5, 2001 - 20:06 UTC
    • Thankyou - petersand - September 5, 2001 - 21:21 UTC