*From*: dsavory@xxxxxxxxx*To*: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 10:45:54 -0600 (MDT)

Numbers do not exist in nature. That we invented a number system for use in the natural world in which countable items may be found is surely non-momentous. Morbidly numerous objects like grains of sand and difficult-to-count objects by the nebulosity like clouds are no reason to throw non-momentousness into doubt.

This brings me to Richard's original objection to Mandelbrot and fractals. Surely Richard doesn't believe that mathematicians have confused the map for the territory (that Borgesian story I referred to.) Mathematicians are aware that mathematical propositions only map onto each other exactly/ axiomatically; they are approximations when mapped onto the real world. Moreover, a mathematician would never make a stronger claim than “The coastline of Britain can be scaled up and down” or “The branching pattern in trees seems fractal”; the business of mathematics is looking for numerical patterns not explaining them.

About Kant I say nothing. The mere mention of his name gives me a headache.

David Savory

Vancouver

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

**Follow-Ups**:**[lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch?***From:*Robert Paul

**[lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch?***From:*palma

- » [lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch? - dsavory
- » [lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch?- Robert Paul
- » [lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch?- Walter C. Okshevsky
- » [lit-ideas] Re: how long until lunch?- palma