orangery on Nostr: I could argue: 2+2=4 is only an anlogy that works in our macroscopic observable ...
I could argue: 2+2=4 is only an anlogy that works in our macroscopic observable world. Numbers are just an invention of humans to describe what say are observing. But in a quantum world where everything is uncertain (to our minds) we actually don’t know if terms like this make really sense.
The problem is, there is no way to proof that 2+2=4. But the fact we haven’t found a way to proof it wrong makes it a very likely assumption.
Actually in the very basis it’s „not even wrong“
Published at
2024-12-09 08:24:26Event JSON
{
"id": "8fa6eb4c42083e66df5333cdd42e46f9ca5d1c015e554234b5ef3bd3af578fa5",
"pubkey": "ccc1cca7c7a2a7b0418823e1934548c461f83461d70a349f3c2202e6c0f3896b",
"created_at": 1733732666,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"073b82899d6831669ce931b18e8e12e64b0b81dc069acab1b0dc428608d6d315",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5e816e6d5c3ff651b5d3407f1c7f7b432a07f1cf06e13c4054e2d5ef10d0f2e5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"65912a7ad17fd5cf3bacce9759f3bea3a44f9a3397340e559cf067945dc638bf"
],
[
"p",
"ba5115c37b0f911e530ed6c487ccbd9b737da33fd4b88a9f590860378c06af62"
],
[
"p",
"a96a35a224402b8075c4da20f0477896afcc3395b6fad63e30a648a8222a6a69"
],
[
"p",
"1bc70a0148b3f316da33fe3c89f23e3e71ac4ff998027ec712b905cd24f6a411"
]
],
"content": "I could argue: 2+2=4 is only an anlogy that works in our macroscopic observable world. Numbers are just an invention of humans to describe what say are observing. But in a quantum world where everything is uncertain (to our minds) we actually don’t know if terms like this make really sense.\n\nThe problem is, there is no way to proof that 2+2=4. But the fact we haven’t found a way to proof it wrong makes it a very likely assumption.\nActually in the very basis it’s „not even wrong“",
"sig": "8bd7d136e17c61fb47c20fac2b656da5e6f715ef2ae467bde28d481b0a38267322730dd6614f1da998af405063b87f44dcf08244d5772f80f8eb13d77f579149"
}
