Well, it was never my intent to "win".

I just wanted to make a point about mathematics.

When it comes to theories such as String Theory, Quantum Mechanics, and General Relativity, the specific details of how mathematical concepts such as infinity are formally defined become important.

I personally believe that the current mathematical definitions of infinity are indeed incorrect with respect to the true nature of the universe. So from that perspective I question whether mathematics represents truth.

However, I will confess that this is a personal view on my part.

Most mathematicians would agree with you that mathematics represents truth. So you have the whole mathematical community on your side actually.

Truth is always tainted by perception.

truth is that the world really is flat and carried on the backs of four giant elephants

Truth is that we live in a holographic reality

Hold the light higher... I think I see something.

What happens to math when reality changes.

What if you flipped the math upside down... Would it still arrive at truths.

Would those truths apply in this realm.

Truth is one of those words I always shudder at when I hear it because it is so often used synonomously with the word fact. The two words actually have different meanings, based on entemology and the meanings have become obscured. I never know, when a person says the word truth if they are actually meaning to say fact.

So if I can ask, in the middle of this discussion, how do each of you use and understand the words fact and truth in the context of a conversation?

Truth is a property(or not) of a statement. A statement is completely dependent upon language for it's very existence. Language is man-made.

Therefore, truth is also... man-made.

The Truth About Reality



1.Absolute Reality (AR)

With an absolute reality we usually mean a reality in which we can perform scientific measurements to test the validity of a statement. Usually one assumes that such a reality is structured and logical, and rules can be given which explain known phenomenae and predict new ones. One also takes care that the system under study is sufficiently separated from the surroundings. Sadly enough this can never be achieved and what we call the actual system under investigation is determined by our choice of the point where quantum effects play no significant role anymore and classical (macroscopic) physics starts.
We need to define our measuring apparatus as a classical object, since only classical objects cause the collapse of the quantummechanical wave function of the system under study. A pure quantummechanical free system obeys time reversal, hence it's the measurement process (the actual collapse of the wavefunction), which introduces a time irreversability and gives a direction to time, the same direction in which, according to our observation, entropy (chaos) increases.

The problem is that the concept of measurement is still under debate in the current formulation of quantummechanics; classical physics is not only retrieved in the limit when Planck's constant goes to zero, but is sadly enough also needed in the formulation of quantum mechanics.

In quantum mechanics one describes the world as a space of infinite dimension called Hilbert space. In fact, this can be regarded as a space of all possible events: a superposition of all possible states. When one measures a variable X, one forces the system into one of the possible X states. At that particular moment a snapshot of the universe is being made, which can be totally described by a particular infinite dimensional state vector of Hilbert space. Surprisingly enough, on a higher level the measurement plus the measured state X itself, is a state of the total system: Hilbert space also contains the set of all measurements with all their outcomes! But what meta-measurement then causes the universe to be in the state of this measurement? Three possibilities remain:

Behaviour of the universe: increasing of the total entropy.
If really all measurements/events take place because they contribute to the necessary increase of entropy, it means that we have no free will. In the sense that our decisions or thoughts are caused by a tendency of the whole universe: individual choices/creativity do not exist. As long as we don't have the feeling that we are restricted by this, it would be fine for me. Thinking one has a free will in fact means one has a free will, it might well be the only possible definition of free will.
The influence of a self-conscious being.
Being part of the universe we would be able to impose a particular total state vector on the universe. A part of the universe influencing the whole? This would again imply a decoupling of self-conscious beings from the material universe.
The influence of an outsider
By definition an outsider is a (conscious) being able to observe the universe from the outside, i.e. a God. An obvious paradox here is the fact that the 'outsider' is by definition part of the universe, if he influences (=interacts with) it. Conclusion: a true God can not allow himself to meddle with the universe.
It is questionable if we should believe in quantum mechanics at this general level. Anyway, decisions taken by conscious beings involve energies and changes which are so small that they can be seen as quantum fluctuations of the system (makes you feel insignificant, does it?) Taking this reasoning a bit further, one might conclude that quantum fluctuations and the Heisenberg uncertainty exist because there are self-conscious beings all over the universe.

2.Personal Reality (PR)

This viewpoint immediately induces the question: 'Is the outside world real?', so 'Is there any reality apart from one's own sense of reality?'
There are two observations which indicate that this is indeed true:
Unexpected situations.
In daily life unexpected things can happen, for example one can get struck by lightning. An event like this seems not to be influenced by other self-conscious beings and could thus be regarded as a proof of the reality of the surrounding environment. What about unconscious induction? I believe that unconscious effects are always caused by external stimuli, partly or later acted upon.
Other self-conscious beings and their influence.
Other people seem to have a will, personality and sense of reality of their own. They can clearly impose a sense of reality on you at a moment you don't expect it (eg. somebody hands you a heated tool as a practical joke).
It seems clear that the statement 'If I don't know that something exists, it can still exist' is true. We don't have to explain this in terms of an individual: another person on earth can know about the existence of an object without you knowing about it. The only thing the Personal Reality viewpoint would agree upon is that if you don't know about it, then it's no part of your reality.
One concludes that there are two realities: one's personal sense of reality and the reality of the outside world which provides the stimuli. The stimuli from the outside world form one's interpretation of reality. The same could be true for all other self-conscious beings.

It would be a very interesting thing to assume that we are alone in the universe, that we are the only self-conscious beings. Would it have any influence on the concept reality, if we would disappear? Evidently not, as said before only the personal reality part would not be there anymore and we are left with a universe which evolves according to the rules of quantum mechanics with quantum fluctuations. An absolute reality with no paradoxes caused by conscious beings deciding to perform experiments which alter the total state of the system.

http://www.euronet.nl/users/los/exist.html

Everything is the truth.

Everything is the truth?

Do you mean each individual thing... everything?

Do you mean all things combined... everything?

What do you mean by everything?





A lie is not the truth... is it?

Truth... The world as you see it.

Fact... the world as it is measured by each of us.

conclusion...

Where these two items meet... There also might be truth... as understanding permits.

I mean every THING is truth and all THINGS are truth.

A lie is verbiage and an opinion of a perception or perceptions.

Hmmmm...

Is not the statement 'Everything is the truth' also verbage and necessarily an opinon of your perception?



Just sayin'

ummm proof maybe?

"you want the truth?"


"you can't handle the truth!"

Yea Abra, but I don't think "Size" is the appropriate descriptor. Cantor never used that word, even acknowledging different infinities.

Yes it is. Totally. My opinion.

Everything I say is my opinion.

But aside from 'language' and 'statements' and 'assertions' the truth is the truth.

Every THING is truth.

That I express this concept with language and analytical thought can be considered my opinion by one with another point of view.

Point of view is everything.

This is so true.

Aside from language there is no truth.