Re: War of the Worlds


David Sueme wrote:
> Steven Sousa wrote:
>
> > You might be so insecure that you feel the need to be able to classify
> > all statements as TRUE or FALSE, when those of us with more flexible
> > minds can accept that some statements are properly labelled as UNKNOWN
> > or INDETERMINATE.
>
> Aristotle's logic - to which there has been only one significant (but
> arcane) modification in over 2000 years - is based on the premise that
> any "well formed" proposition is either true or false, but not neither
> and not both. It is sometimes called the "law of the excluded middle",
> but is more usually and correctly called the principle of
> non-contradiction.

*snip blah blah blah*

> Some propositions are unknown. Me and the greatest philosopher of all
> agree that none are indeterminate. That pretty much wraps it up as far
> as I am concerned.
>

You are completely misinterpreting the truth behind Aristotle's
statements here, Dave.

Yes, every "well-formed" proposition is either true or false. (let's
exclude quantum physics, Troels, or else Dave will get confused).

This does NOT mean that if truth cannot be proven yet, falsity is
certain. That is a fallacy.

For the longest time, people couldn't prove that the Earth wasn't flat,
and wasn't at the center of the universe. There are countless other
things that we couldn't prove, as well. We now can prove many of them,
but those that still cannot be proven are not necessarily "false."

Take your example of turning lead into gold. If you understand particle
physics, you should realize that this is indeed possible. Lead has 82
protons in its nucleus, and gold has 79. Thus, by splitting the lead
atoms, either by making them radioactive by adding neutrons or merely
in a particle accelerator, some gold will result.

Thus, you are patently wrong that lead cannot be turned into gold. But,
I'll leave it to Troels to convince you by agreeing that the above is
possible.

So, your argument fails to address the possibility that proving some
propositions correct may not be worth the cost. Turning lead into gold
certainly isn't worth the cost, just to prove that you can. It would
provide no benefit to do so.

Also, I bet lead has turned into gold during the course of some
experiment. However, this occurred on an atom-by-atom basis, and so is
not the economy-changing event you are probably describing. Still, a
significant amount of gold *could* be created in this way...it just
wouldn't be worth it.

Troels?

> Dave

-Aaron

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: From Save My Game: Levels Beyond Levels
    ... I think the first time a party slaughtered a huge ancient red dragon (with ... In 1E a huge, ancient red dragon with 88 hit points was worth 7,758 xp ... Average jewelry value is 2,910 gold pieces. ... Type H treasure has an average of: ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: From Save My Game: Levels Beyond Levels
    ... I think the first time a party slaughtered a huge ancient red dragon (with ... In 1E a huge, ancient red dragon with 88 hit points was worth 7,758 xp ... Average jewelry value is 2,910 gold pieces. ... Type H treasure has an average of: ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: From Save My Game: Levels Beyond Levels
    ... I think the first time a party slaughtered a huge ancient red dragon (with ... In 1E a huge, ancient red dragon with 88 hit points was worth 7,758 xp ... Average jewelry value is 2,910 gold pieces. ... Type H treasure has an average of: ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: YAAP
    ... Gold is one point per gold piece. ... worth it in my mind. ... Excalibur (worth 4000 zorkmids and 10,000 points) ... Will be starting another game soon, hopefully this will stay as my ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.nethack)
  • Re: Question regarding the budget deficit
    ... It used to be that money was gold. ... So when we went off the gold standard, and gold became worth what it should be worth compared to everything else. ... A dollar is created when anyone in the economy creates a dollar worth of wealth. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)