"I know you would like to dismiss a divine order as unnecessary, but your metaphysics has problems which I pointed out. In order to have a pure mathematical order you probably will need an infinite collection of all possible 'math worlds'. This option is very unappealing and frankly I think untenable."

I know I can't compete with you on this playing field, but I'll try anyway. Why would you need an infinite collection of all possible math worlds? Isn't it enough to say "Here are all the possibilities, out of which only one emerged?"

Just because an idea is unappealing doesn't mean it's untenable. I find the theory of relativity unappealing, but it is at least highly accurate (i.e. validated again and again.) I find cauliflower unappealing, too, but it still grows quite proficiently. :)

"A divine order has none of those problems and is very easy to picture why such an order exists to the universe."

The only reason your divine order has such properties is because you know nothing about it. It's easy to take some theoretical divine order, with no known properties, and say "Well, it must be this way because I think it's appealing." Isn't it possible, or even probable, that an external divine order to the universe would have many of the same properties that you find unappealing in mathematics?

• Read about Smolin in the above thread - yanniru - July 18, 2001 - 11:57 UTC
• remarks about divine order - harvey1 - July 18, 2001 - 14:53 UTC
  • No divine order is needed. - alexander - July 18, 2001 - 16:09 UTC
    • Where to buy 'how to compute the universe made simple'? - harvey1 - July 18, 2001 - 17:12 UTC
      • Where to buy? You have to wait - scientists work on it. - alexander - July 18, 2001 - 18:57 UTC
        • I'm afraid that book will be missing chapter 1 - harvey1 - July 18, 2001 - 23:23 UTC
        • all universes obey SAME basic math - yanniru - July 19, 2001 - 11:55 UTC
  • Maybe not - stormcrow - July 18, 2001 - 19:07 UTC
    • I don't think you understand what I'm saying - harvey1 - July 18, 2001 - 19:43 UTC
    • Can you name anything that has been proven not to follow logical - yanniru - July 19, 2001 - 12:05 UTC
      • Hold on here, on "incompleteness" of math. - alexander - July 19, 2001 - 19:09 UTC
        • Derivation is proof in math - yanniru - July 20, 2001 - 00:35 UTC
          • Cannot be derived or do not exist? - stormcrow - July 20, 2001 - 02:03 UTC
            • Neither - yanniru - July 22, 2001 - 17:27 UTC