I'm not talking about Pythagorean's theorem as a mathematical articulation, rather I'm saying that if a mathematical theorem was postulated as a scientific equation that somehow generated the universe (with predictions to boot), then this highly successful approach would still be unconfirmable as a scientific fact. That is, we cannot use science to find ontological laws that cause the universe. Rather, we postulate empirical theories that describe and predict our observations under such and such conditions. That's it.

You seem to be saying that the equations of pure mathematics can somehow be assembled into a scientific TOE theory. That may be possible, but we cannot prove anything ontological about that TOE equation because we don't have omniscient knowledge of the world and therefore cannot make any ontological statements within the framework of science.

What exact statement am I making that you are disagreeing with?

Harv

• Math tells WHAT Universe IS possible and WHAT IS NOT. - alexander - April 13, 2001 - 00:11 UTC
  • As a side note - harvey1 - April 13, 2001 - 18:41 UTC
    • Some of us are ignorant! - doctordick - April 13, 2001 - 19:32 UTC
      • Sure, but let's start a new thread up top (nt) - harvey1 - April 13, 2001 - 19:51 UTC