> At 04:00 PM 18/11/96 MST, Jason McVean wrote:
>
> >I'm not sure it needs to be made of anything. Is the value of pi
> >made of anything? Crudely it is made of numbers, but the constant
> >pi would still have a definite value if we didn't invent
> >numbers. The value of pi, the speed of light, the charge of an
> >electron, etc., are all embedded in OR. The absolute truth is
> >embedded in OR.
>
> I was going to ask how properties of OR can be "embedded" in OR,
> but that would only invite the question how can matter and energy
> be embedded in time and space? I don't know, so I'm willing to
> leave it at that.
>
> >An aside: Is logic more fundamental that physics?
>
> I would say a logical impossibility is more impossible than
> a physical impossibility. Does that make logic more fundamental?
I view a logical impossibility as a content-free impossibility, while a
physical impossibility [for instance] needs formal [if not actual]
meaning to be impossible.
I don't think this really addresses the issue 'which is more fundamental'.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/
/ Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////