PHYSICAL-PROCESSUAL REPRESENTATION OF IRRATIONAL NUMBERS
Raphael Neelamkavil, Ph.D., Dr. phil.
Irrational numbers are those numbers which have no direct or quasi-indirect representation by anything that may rationally be represented in nature. But they may be represented by mind and thought, by use of connotative universals and their denotative representations.
This means that the quantitative qualities that numbers are will be manipulated connotatively by the connotative concatenations of concepts in order to help irrational numbers represent existent realities and their processes. This presupposes that numbers, as quantitatively qualitative universes, are ontological universals, and not those with merely connotatively conscious manipulations of the ontological universals that numbers are.
But does it then mean that there are no natural object / process or natural kind groups of objects / processes, which are representable by irrational numbers? No. What I want to communicate in the statements above is that direct or quasi direct representations are not available for irrational numbers. direct representation is for whole numbers, and quasi-indirect ones for all other numbers other than irrational ones.
The reason why numbers are abstract is that they are quantitative qualities -- a sort of ontological universals. These are in fact the abstract objects of physical processes (in their occurrence in natural kinds of processual entities) which give rise to numerical systems, geometrical forms, etc. in thought. Irrational numbers are the result of mental concatenation of natural ordinary numbers in minds. I call them not as connotative universals but as concatenations of connotative universals.
Qualities are always pure universals. Insofar as they are attributable to existent processes, numbers are ontological universals with pertinence to existent things. But insofar as numbers are taken into theory by means of connotative and denotative manipulation by mathematical theory, there arise irrational numbers. If not, irrational numbers would not arise at all.
For this reason, I argue that irrational numbers are no ontological universals; and they can at the most be universals in theory, namely, connotative (consciousness-based, produced by conscious activity) and denotative (represented in languages of all kinds, including natural and artificial languages like mathematics, algorithms, etc.) universals.
We know already that questions as to whether irrational numbers exist or not are usual. But how to find this out from the manner of representation of physical processes? The foundations of this sort of a theory is what I suggetst here.
THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS
3.1. Traditional Physical Categories
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Ontology_behind_Physics
The question about a specific meaning of irrational numbers in nature is irrelevant, because we can approximate every irrational number with a rational number. We always can select the accuracy of the approximation in a way that the remaining difference to the irrational number does not matter in the considered context.
Already a known fact. But did I speak anything against such numerical manipulations? I think I spoke basically of something else.
But, of course, thanks for the constant criticism. It helps me.
Raphael Neelamkavil "But did I speak anything against such numerical manipulations?"
Yes, suggesting a relevant meaning to the difference between irrational and rational numbers explicitly ignores that this difference vanishes if we apply those manipulations. With your queer theory, you try to hide that with simple algebra we can disenthral irrational numbers, and reveal that they cannot have any special meaning in physics.
Such rationally manipulated representations of physical things or processes by irrational numbers are representations, but in terms of connotatively constructed denotations. You do not ever represent by irrational numbers anything existent, like with rational numbers. What I mean is direct representations, not connotatively denotative ones. If you do not want to make or perceive any difference, it is upto you. Continue so.
Raphael Neelamkavil "You do not ever represent by irrational numbers anything existent, like with rational numbers."
That is not correct. The diagonal of a square with a rational side length definitively exists, but has an irrational value. But being irrational or rational does not meaning anything for the role of the diagonal length or the side length in nature.
I have revised the lead text in a manner that may clarify my standpoint on the formation of numbers in terms of their natural foundations and their mental manner of formation (already discussed in other discussion texts of mine in RG) into various kinds of quantities.
All of you readers are being compelled to accept these arguments. But critiques are welcome, of course in a manner that explains the reasons behind the critiques well enough.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_Are_Numbers_and_Shapes_and_Their_Structures_Considered_by_Many_as_Exact
Why Are Numbers and Shapes (and Their Structures) Considered by Many as Exact?
Henry Margenau in his article “Einstein’s Conception of Reality” in Paul Schilpp’s collection Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (1970) suggests the relationship between physicists and philosophers: “Every discoverer of a new physical principle makes an important contribution to philosophy, even though he may not discuss it in philosophical terms.” (Margenau 1970: 246)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Grounded_Physical-Ontological_Categories_behind_Physics
Grounded (New) Physical-Ontological Categories behind Physics
Preprint THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS: CRITIQUE OF TRADITIONAL PHYSICA...
A SIMPLE GAME-CHANGER CAUSALITY FOR PHYSICS: Beyond the Two Millennia
https://www.researchgate.net/post/A_SIMPLE_GAME-CHANGER_CAUSALITY_FOR_PHYSICS_Beyond_the_Two_Millennia
https://www.researchgate.net/post/DEFINITION_OF_THE_ONTOLOGY_BEHIND_PHYSICS_5_Paragraphs
DEFINITION OF THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS (5 Paragraphs)
THE ANOMALY IN MATHEMATICAL / THEORETICAL PHYSICS (Short Text)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/THE_ANOMALY_IN_MATHEMATICAL_THEORETICAL_PHYSICS_Short_Text
What would be the theoretical difference between representing physical processes by using (1) rational numbers including repeated decimal numbers and (2) irrational numbers?
My question is not about the mathematical difference involved in converting one to the other or creating one from the other. I am asking about the theoretical justifications for the representational practice.
This is a serious and somewhat complex matter to discuss:
NON-FOUNDATIONS OF ‘WAVICLES’ IN EINSTEIN-PODOLSKY-ROSEN PARADOX: Bases for Quantum Physics to Evolve (Maybe a physical-ontological Breakthrough)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/NON-FOUNDATIONS_OF_WAVICLES_IN_EINSTEIN-PODOLSKY-ROSEN_PARADOX_Bases_for_Quantum_Physics_to_Evolve_Maybe_a_physical-ontological_Breakthrough
AGAINST COSMIC ISOTROPY, CONFORMAL CYCLIC COSMOS, ETERNAL INFLATION, etc.: A Critique of Identity, Simultaneity, Cosmic Repetition / Recycling, etc.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/AGAINST_COSMIC_ISOTROPY_CONFORMAL_CYCLIC_COSMOS_ETERNAL_INFLATION_etc_A_Critique_of_Identity_Simultaneity_Cosmic_Repetition_Recycling_etc
Preprint A SIMPLE GAME-CHANGER CAUSALITY FOR PHYSICS Beyond the Two Millennia
Preprint ESSENTIAL LOGIC, EPISTEMOLOGY, AND ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS, ...
Preprint ESSENTIAL LOGIC, EPISTEMOLOGY, AND ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS, ...
WHAT IS THE MYSTERIOUS STUFF OF INFORMATION? A Short but Clear Definition
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHAT_IS_THE_MYSTERIOUS_STUFF_OF_INFORMATION_A_Short_but_Clear_Definition
Preprint COSMIC ISOTROPY, CONFORMAL CYCLIC COSMOS, ETERNAL INFLATION:...
THE PLANCK ERA / QUANTUM ERA and “DISAPPEARANCE” OF PHYSICAL CAUSALITY: “OMNIPOTENCE” OF MATHEMATICS
https://www.researchgate.net/post/THE_PLANCK_ERA_QUANTUM_ERA_and_DISAPPEARANCE_OF_PHYSICAL_CAUSALITY_OMNIPOTENCE_OF_MATHEMATICS
Can mathematical representation of physical processes be based on the causal nature of physical processes?
Preprint PLANCK ERA or QUANTUM ERA,and ”DISAPPEARANCE” OF CAUSALITY. ...
Preprint CAUSAL HORIZONAL RESEARCH: A METHODOLOGY IN PHYSICS Raphael ...
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHAT_IS_INFORMATION_WHAT_IS_ITS_CAUSAL_OR_NON-CAUSAL_CORE_A_Discussion
Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted
Preprint LINGUISTIC HERESY OF DENOTATIVE ABSOLUTISM: PHYSICAL-BIOLOGI...
https://www.researchgate.net/post/ONTOLOGICAL_DIFFERENCES_OF_CHARACTERISTICS_OF_ARTIFICIAL_AND_BIOLOGICAL_INTELLIGENCE_ALGORITHMS_AND_PROCEDURES_Against_Exaggerations
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHY_EXACTLY_THE_WAVE-PARTICLE_DUALITY_Phenomenal_Ontological_Commitment_POC_as_the_Solution
https://www.researchgate.net/post/UNTENABLE_REIFICATION_OF_CONCEPTS_IN_PHYSICS_With_Examples
Preprint WHY EXACTLY WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY? Phenomenal Ontological Co...
https://www.researchgate.net/post/DO_PHYSICAL_QUANTA_EXIST_Why_Should_CONSCIOUSNESS_Be_Treated_Quantum-Biologically
https://www.researchgate.net/post/HEIDEGGER_How_a_Philosopher_Destroys_His_Own_Thoughts_Coherence_and_Adequacy
Preprint UNIVERSAL CAUSALITY AND THE PHYSICAL-ONTOLOGICAL DEFECT OF N...
Preprint DIFFERENCES IN THE CONCEPTS OF CAUSALITY IN METAPHYSICS AND ...
Preprint BEYOND CAUSAL ITERATION QUANTIFIABILITY IN LINGUISTIC SPACE-TIME
Preprint BEYOND THE CAUSAL ITERATION METHOD. Short Text (Beyond Judea Pearl)
Preprint REFERENCE, APPLICABILITY, AND ADEQUACY OF UNIVERSALS, INFORM...
Preprint DENOTATIVE ABSOLUTISM. A 20TH CENTURY LOGICAL AND LINGUISTIC HERESY
Preprint INEVITABILITY OF COSMOLOGICAL, ONTOLOGICAL, AND EPISTEMOLOGI...
Preprint Introducing GRAVITATIONAL COALESCENCE PARADOX: COSMOGENETIC CAUSALITY
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Data Mining
- Classification