Can existence outside of the physical world be defined and discussed?

  • Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Physical
In summary, the physical universe necessitates the presence of a physical observer in order to exist.

Are observers physical?

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 55.9%
  • No

    Votes: 14 41.2%
  • Depends whether you yourself are an observer or an object

    Votes: 1 2.9%

  • Total voters
    34
  • #71
paw tracker said:
See Feynmans quantum mechanics interpretation of the particle duality

Where can I see it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
mmarko said:
As Wittgenstein discusses, only the physical can be discussed. The meta-physical cannot. Therefore a discussion of existence outside the logical space of existence is not something that can be defined in order to be considered.
What on Earth does the first sentence mean? Simply that this is Wittgenstein's definition of discussion? Is mmarko agreeing with that?
If so how can one discuss mathematics, music and so on? I can easily find a definition of Zemelo's theorem, but find it impossible to do the equivalent with, say, Chopin's Prelude No. 17. I can discuss both, but neither are to my mind physical.

Wittgenstein may or may not have been a genius, but he never got over his theory of maths being ignored at a conference in 1930 by preference for Godel. This gave him a fanatical bias against unending processes, and ultimately restricted him to discussing the physical. The kindest opinion I have heard of his maths theory is 'naive'

Ernies
 

Similar threads

Replies
190
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
823
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
361
Replies
10
Views
782
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
784
Replies
14
Views
926
Replies
8
Views
922
Replies
3
Views
102
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
700
Back
Top