From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!pmafire!mica.inel.gov!guinness!opal.idb Tue Apr  7 23:23:48 EDT 1992
Article 4882 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!pmafire!mica.inel.gov!guinness!opal.idb
su.edu!holmes
>From: holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: The 'Big Bang' and the origin of 'mathematical  objects'
Message-ID: <1992Apr2.181440.11808@guinness.idbsu.edu>
Date: 2 Apr 92 18:14:40 GMT
References: <kth7fnINNflu@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: usenet@guinness.idbsu.edu (Usenet News mail)
Organization: Boise State University Math Dept.
Lines: 37
Nntp-Posting-Host: opal

In article <kth7fnINNflu@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> silber@orfeo.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Silber) writes:
>
> If you take the view that the universe had an origin, and if
> you take that origin to be characterized by the 'Big Bang' theory
> elaborated in physical science research, then the origin of the
> universe entailed the creation of mass-time-energy and its
> constraint, within the first 10^(-(Sagan's billions) ) sec. ,
> to certain configurations.  These 'configurations' 
> 'specified' in the 'original conditions' of the Big Bang
> are patterns, but they are not neccessarilly theories.
> It is reasonable to ask of the 'mathematical realists' to
> demonstrate how these initial configurational-constraints
> of the Big Bang entail the existence of "real mathematical objects".
> Apparently, the reason mathematical realists call 'it' "mathematical-
> realism", is that they assert the objective existence of mathematical
> objects as part of the totality of the universe (as distinguished from
> "spiritual objects" from beyond the great beyond).  Thus,
> "real mathematical objects" must be explainable, predictable consequences
> of a complete theory of the origin of the universe.

	Mathematical objects are not physical--the "Big Bang" is
irrelevant to their existence or non-existence.  They are also
eternal (they have no relationship to time) and therefore the question
of a physical beginning for such objects makes no sense.

				Sincerely,
				M. Randall Holmes
				Math Dept, Boise State Univ.
				holmes@opal.idbsu.edu

The opinions expressed above are not the "official" opinions of any
person or institution.



-- 
	--alex			alex@opal.idbsu.edu


