Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!paganini.bofh.team!news.killfile.org!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail From: b.schafer@ed.ac.uk (Burkhard) Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: The Golden Ratio Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:08:24 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org Message-ID: References: <1qpw4ee.14tn9ens20jujN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <86msremg6h.fsf@example.com> <1qpwgb6.k2qlvp1ojjqsbN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <6dd62ebaf3b773a727d81965478d3da8@www.novabbs.com> <1qqfm8e.n5aqwsw88jzoN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89"; logging-data="35528"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org" User-Agent: Rocksolid Light To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org Return-Path: X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org id 556C722976C; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:07:03 -0400 (EDT) by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEA1229758 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:07:01 -0400 (EDT) id 9DB1C5DCC9; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org by mod-relay-1.kamens.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FCB5DC6E for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:10:37 +0000 (UTC) id 24C1C598003; Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:10:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Injection-Info: ; posting-account="t+lO0yBNO1zGxasPvGSZV1BRu71QKx+JE37DnW+83jQ"; X-Rslight-Posting-User: fa01bdcbb842461c7a59775e46dff884d09136ae X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$PFz6yQb1W2GJBPs4OTeL2ucOgl0l24Xh0yOInm1JPnPWegTF.BtIS Bytes: 5162 Lines: 78 erik simpson wrote: > On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote: >> Burkhard wrote: >> >>> J. J. Lodder wrote: >>> >>>> Richmond wrote: >>> >>>>> nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes: >>>>> >>>>>> dgb wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Does this occur by accident? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or by design? >>>>>> >>>>>> Mathematics doesn't occur. >>>>>> It is. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature. >>> >>>> The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be >>>> is irrelevant for mathematics, >>> >>>> Jan >>> >>> a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >>> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >>> a lower profile than in the past due to work >> >> Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious: >> Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length? Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting. >> >>> b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >>> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >>> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his >>> famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >>> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >>> argument for scientific realism. >> >> Yes, I know, but this is hardly news. >> Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of >> mathematics. (as he knew it) >> >> As for Wigner, >> I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide >> when seeing the present state of Math and Phys. >> Could he really bring himself to believe >> that "uggly theories are good!"? >> Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong? >> >> He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation >> of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible >> scale. (worse than ever seen before) >> >> We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes, >> give or take a few, and not a single prediction. >> The argumnt from design can only be beaten down >> with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles. >> >> Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss >> can comfort us with some good words about it, >> >> Jan >> > With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness > we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked. Or my favorite > Pauliism: that's not even wrong!