Dick,

***Yes, that is very analogous to what I have done and it surprised me that Harv would not accept such an abstract representation as rational in that he implied he was familiar with Godel's work. The whole issue in both cases is to assure the absolute generality of the representation.***

Gödel numbering has no metaphysical claims attached. There's no mention about his numbers being reality, etc. Rather, it is a straightforward approach of numeric representation and symbolism. If you want to drop all the metaphysical definitions then I believe you could achieve an interesting mathematical result.

Warm regards, Harv

• To Dick - yanniru - April 17, 2002 - 20:27 UTC
  • That's great! - doctordick - April 17, 2002 - 21:10 UTC
    • To Dick - yanniru - April 20, 2002 - 13:40 UTC
      • this different Yanniru? Is this forum spo - carefuluniverse - April 20, 2002 - 20:56 UTC
        • It's hard to get people to rethink their ideas. - doctordick - April 20, 2002 - 21:30 UTC
          • yes...makes lot o' sense - carefuluniverse - April 20, 2002 - 21:39 UTC
          • First you have to convince physicists - harvey1 - April 21, 2002 - 00:46 UTC
            • Yeh! - doctordick - April 21, 2002 - 15:18 UTC
              • Are you Galileo? - harvey1 - April 21, 2002 - 15:22 UTC
                • Harv, you miss the point of citing examples in history - carefuluniverse - April 21, 2002 - 17:16 UTC
      • Without the math, it's pretty undefendable! - doctordick - April 20, 2002 - 21:17 UTC
        • Thanks - yanniru - April 21, 2002 - 20:56 UTC