Ontological Mathematics And The T.O.E.: When Did Existence Occur?
Did existence come into being at some point, or has it always existed? Did thought come before movement, or movement before thought?
Join Joe Postma as he explores this and other questions, including ontological mathematics and the Theory of Everything.
Trackback from your site.
schutzhund
| #
“Existence is a self-sufficient primary. It is not a product of a supernatural dimension, or of anything else. There is nothing antecedent to existence, nothing apart from it — and no alternative to it. Existence exists — and only existence exists. Its existence and its nature are irreducible and unalterable.”
Leonard Peikoff, “The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy”
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 109
Reply
schutzhund
| #
“Existence and identity are not attributes of existents, they are the existents. . . . The units of the concepts “existence” and “identity” are every entity, attribute, action, event or phenomenon (including consciousness) that exists, has ever existed or will ever exist.”
“Axiomatic Concepts”
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 56
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
e^(ipi) +1 = 0
e^(ipi) = -1
23.140i = -1?
How can doing any mathematic function with two different irrational numbers result in a rational number?
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
God created every thing. Nothing existed before God. He existed before the universe and before time. God had no beginning Nothing but God existed before any created thing came into existence.
Reply
robt
| #
Gödel disagreed. But of course, one could argue that because God is ‘outside’ the universe then the axioms (of existence) can be proved. But does that mean there are two universes? That’s a paradox, because then there would have to be a universe of universes, so there is no such entity as a universe, unless there is an infinite hierarchy of Gods, therefore not one God.
The first incompleteness theorem states that in any consistent formal system
F within which a certain amount of arithmetic can be carried out, there are statements of the language of F which can neither be proved nor disproved in F.
According to the second incompleteness theorem, such a formal system cannot prove that the system itself is consistent (assuming it is indeed consistent).
Well, enough of that … there are things that can never be known; they just Are.
Reply
Ozwedge
| #
God is presumed to be supernatural and therefore outside the natural universe. So multiple universes or gods are not necessary.
Reply
VOWG
| #
I exist, therefore I am.
Reply
Seriously
| #
I am, therefore I exist…😉
Reply
Ozwedge
| #
I’m impressed that he has solved the greatest mystery known to man.
A paradox must logically precede a solution. If they occur at the same time then the paradox can’t be resolved because it doesn’t exist because it’s already been resolved. Which is probably a paradox in itself ?
I look forward to the explanation how absolutely nothing has the power to create something from nothing.
I’m guessing it’ll take him 6 days, as he’ll need a day of rest 🙂
Reply