"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 01:15:52 GMT, "Rich Wilson"
wrote:

I don't think you've quite got the gist of what I'm suggesting - it's not
different names for the same things, it's a different set of concepts that
you couldn't "pair up" with our own.

If they are not simply different names for the same thing then one, or
the other, would be a 'more accurate' understanding, or both flawed.

So you ARE saying there is exactly 1 way of thinking about the universe that
works. That's a pretty big assumption to make. Do you have any particular
reason for believing that?


pi does not 'look the same' in binary, base 8 or base 16, as it does
in base 10 but it is still pi whether one says it in French or
Chinese.

OK, pi=pi however you write it. OK...

That's one reason why it's 'real', it is not 'just a concept'
and not an invention of the mind.

I could make up a number and argue exactly the same, and it would still be
made up.

No, because pi is not 'made up'.

Do I have to spell it out?
Look, I've just made up a number called "qwerty". Here's what you said
applied to my made-up number:

qwerty does not 'look the same' in binary, base 8 or base 16, as it does in
base 10 but it is still qwerty whether one says it in French or Chinese.
That's one reason why it's 'real', it is not 'just a concept' and not an
invention of the mind.

So by your argument that makes qwerty as real as pi!