Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (13966)	1/3/2000 2:17:00 PM
From: St_Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

At the risk of having to start a philosophy thread, which I wouldn't mind, it's amazing to discover that strictly speaking, even mathematics has problems when it comes to providing indubitable truth. Russell and Whitehead tried to reduce math to logic about a century ago (believng that logic at least got us statements that were impossible to doubt). They failed. Later it was discovered that Arithmetic is incomplete. And things then got really weird. 2+2=4. This is hard to doubt. But the outstanding question in the philosophy of mathematics turns out to be why? The truth of mathematics turns out to be very hard to explain. Fun book about all this:GODEL ESCHER BACH

To: TigerPaw who wrote (13966)	1/3/2000 5:10:00 PM
From: Dinesh	Respond to of 54805

TP, Janet: (1) I believe Computer Science is a branch of mathematics. Until the CS roster became very heavy of its own weight, many universities housed CS under Math. (2) As to the WHY of '2+2=4'. Let us not mix the study of "X" with the study of "why of X". The former belongs to the "X" dept while the latter come usually from the Philosophy folks. (3) Questioning everything as the way to find the answer is a very Western method of thinking. Sometimes all you need to do is raise the question and let the answer(s) float back to you. E.g., usenet. ::-)