When using a language whose alphabet is finite — including maths — no general infinite systems may be fully characterized.

Lao Tzu opens his “The Classic Book of the Way and its Power” (the “Tao Teh Ching”) with:

“The way that can be spoken is not the real Way. The name that can be named is not the real Name.

About 2,600 years later, a scientific argument explains why this is true.

The paper, “Limits to Maths” — available here (*) — compels rethinking the work of Cantor, Godel, Russell, Turing and many, many others, by compelling the rethinking of the consistency of number (as accepted by current orthodoxy).  What emerges is a nuanced aspect of the scientific worldview in which any scientific mathematical model has a horizon of validity (based on infinitary limits) outside of which the model can no longer be valid.

reed.burkhart@gmail.com

(*) if affordability is an issue, please email me and we can work something out.  Btw, this paper was researched over several years’ spare time (adding up to many thousands of hours study!).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.