You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

DataPacRat comments on How confident are you in the Atomic Theory of Matter? - Less Wrong Discussion

0 Post author: DataPacRat 19 January 2013 08:39PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (80)

Comments (80)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DataPacRat 20 January 2013 01:02:59AM 9 points [-]

Mainly, because estimating the accuracy of a math statement brings in various philosophical details about the nature of math and numbers, which would likely distract from the focus on theories relating to the nature of our universe. So I went for the most foundational physical theory I could think of... and phrased it rather poorly.

If you have a suggestion on how to un-vague-ify my main post, I'd be happy to read it.

Comment author: [deleted] 20 January 2013 05:21:09AM 1 point [-]

Mainly, because estimating the accuracy of a math statement brings in various philosophical details about the nature of math and numbers, which would likely distract from the focus on theories relating to the nature of our universe.

Except it doesn't -- whether or not we can know those philosophical details are conditional on the accuracy of human hardware, which as far as I can tell is what you want people to estimate.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit