Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Corrected Post

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Michael W. Pearson on November 14, 2001 15:05:34 UTC

Depending on your definition of "absolute" proof,
math proofs may be absolute, for they make only specific claims which proceed from relationships between precisely defined terms -- in fact, all the universe's math logics could be as circular --as far as I know
-- or are you saying nothing can ever be absolute? Math, by definition, can be absolute because it only makes limited claims.
A definition is an absolute. Yes, definitions
are conditional. Absolutes can be conditional
-- in fact must be conditional. . . or we would be talking about undifferentiated mush.
Therefore, an "absolute" is a sub-unit of relationships and relativity -- according to the definition I'm living with.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins