The discussion centers around the concept of fundamental reality as proposed by Sean Carroll, specifically the idea that reality can be understood as a vector in Hilbert space, with other elements like space, fields, and particles being emergent properties. The scope includes theoretical implications, philosophical considerations, and the relationship between mathematical constructs and physical reality.
Participants express a range of views, with no consensus reached. Some agree with the potential of Carroll's proposal, while others strongly contest its validity and implications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between mathematical constructs and physical reality.
Participants note the limitations of the discussion, including the ambiguity in definitions of "reality," the dependence on philosophical interpretations, and the unresolved nature of the mathematical descriptions involved.
And rightly so. Without an implementation to carry out mathematics, it is just a collection of true statements, nothing happening.PeroK said:Die Glaube is immer maechtiger als der Zweifel.
I think the quotation was intended as ironic resignation, rather than a celebration of dogma!A. Neumaier said:And rightly so. Without an implementation to carry out mathematics, it is just a collection of true statements, nothing happening.
Why should nothing happen? Happen in what sense? Can you give an example? Is it like the central dogma of biology?PeroK said:I think the quotation was intended as ironic resignation, rather than a celebration of dogma!