Banno

Why not?

Simply, the sentences say that they are unprovable; since they are indeed unprovable, they are true.

In any system complex enough to do arithmetic - that is, any system complex enough to allow for counting - there will be some truths that cannot be de...

"The cat is on the mat" is not a contradiction. And it is not true.

Case in point: Hereabouts, it's the white ones that are rare.

Scientific laws have the form of universal statements. See Popper et al. "For every reaction there is an opposite and equal reaction" "every force is ...

Astronomers assume that what happens locally also happens universally; SO the spectrum of Iron measured in a lab is assumed to be the same as that mea...

what you quoted was just a phrasing of the principle of relativity, simplified for the audience.

I am just doubtful that I am in the presence of genius rather than psycoceramics.

The laws of physics are universally applicable. That’s what makes them laws. Curiously, the laws of electromagnetism- Maxwells Equations- predict a ve...

hm. Think that puts an end to the discussion.

@"Metaphysician Undercover", do you really believe that the last 110 years of physics is built on an error?

X-) If he does not get relativity, it's no wonder he has difficulty with Davidson.

Meta, both Angie and Beth agree as to what happened. They agree that the events were simultaneous for Angie, but not for Beth. Your interpretation is ...

Meta must be having a lend of us. He's just in it to be contrary.

Clearly, that is not what was said.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fIJRofWE1f0/WYtOgYEO-2I/AAAAAAAAHnM/4XoXvJYXucglA4uNP8nnHl6oAmssdEvZgCLcBGAs/s1600/Welcome%2Bto%2Bscience%2Bhell%252C%2Bpro...

Yep.

I doff my hat to you, @"VagabondSpectre".

Quite so. I keep coming back here.

@"Metaphysician Undercover"; @"fishfry" It occurs to me that it might be clearer to re-arange the scope of the statement; It is true both that: events...

So Angie and Beth sit facing each other for a meal. Angie orders a soup, and the waiter sets the soup spoon. For Angie, the soup spoon is on the right...

Contemplate this: From Angie's frame of reference, events A and B occur at the same time. From Beth's frame of reference, A occurs before B. These two...

I'm pretty sure we have hd this discussion before. @"Fishfry" is right in that your introduction of belief radically changes the argument. It's what i...

Thank you, @"fishfry". It is apparent I had misunderstood you. My apologies. Going back to the start, I had taken this to be along the lines of Gould'...

But what is wrong with contradictions? They are explosive. A ^ ~A ? B Accepting a contradiction renders our accounts limitless; and hence useless.

Well, I'm going to go with that. Physicists do not conclude from this that there is an actual contradiction in the universe. Rather, they look for a w...

I had a tooth pulled last week. It was easier than this. Quicker, too. It's non-locality, isn't it. Relativity implies that nothing can travel faster ...

Arg. The references you have given do not support this claim. So, what is it that is implied by QM, and yet its contradiction is implied by Relativity...

I think Street's excellent point has been missed; and it is an excellent point because it is the very same one I tried to make earlier. Dialetheism is...

For me, if you say A are inconsistent, it means that they imply (materially) a contradiction. That's were I was stuck with your previous comments. So,...

What? Where? Ah! You mean it is incompatible.

Well said.

If we were to come across propositions that were apparently both true and contradictory, the proper response would of course be to re-phrase the propo...

When I were lad, if two theories were not logically consistent, then one contradicted the other. But if that is not what you intended to say, then for...

@"fishfry" What are the inconsistencies in physics? Specifically. Realy interested.

Non-locality is an observation, and a conclusion, not an assumption. I really don't want your support. It does not help.

That's of course not the same as saying that modern physics is illogical, which seems to be the implication of the OP. The series of posts I made on t...

I enjoyed Searle's book. The argument here, however, as no doubt FishFry will agree, is missing an assumption needed to make it valid: that all abstra...

Odd that these replies are not about my actual rebuttal of the OP.

Well, no, I'm not. I just pointed out that logic is the basic grammar we use in conversation. Indeed, I was at pains to point out that if one sort of ...

Even the most flippant topologist knows there are knots that are not knots. X-)

This claim is unreferenced in the article. What is this purported inconsistency?

Axioms are not what they used to be. There are unprovable, yet true statements in any sufficiently interesting axiomatic system. Physics is surely suf...

Good call. I wonder, if the forum accepts posts from crackpots, what the result will be. Will it attract more crackpots? I don't think so; I suspect t...

Perhaps; even if he hasn't thank for the post - I now have the lectures on my list...

Cheers.

I don't agree. Logic underpins the language of physics as much as of anything else. It would be absurd to think of logic and physics as incommensurate...

That's a good point. One might take "...at the same time" as a colloquial simplification of "...in the same frame of reference"

Er, unless those propositions are about the world "outside our heads". As if language did not apply to the various things that make up our world.