Or the \"Knot of Truths?\" (Endings)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Thursday, June 18, 2009, 19:38 (5635 days ago) @ George Jelliss

xeno6696: &quot;As for transcendental functions being &quot;in the mind of the mathematician&quot; only, I used to think that too except you can observe PI, e, and the golden ratio in nature.&quot;&#13;&#10;> &#13;&#10;> No you can&apos;t. Only approximations to them. And probably only to a few decimal places. 3.14159, 2.71828, 1.61803 are probably more than sufficent for most purposes.&#13;&#10;> - You missed my point. The ratio that the number PI represents is a discrete and real truth. Though the search for an exact function is ongoing, the precision isn&apos;t as earth-shaking as the fact that the ratio both exists and is observable. PI can be calculated with arbitrary precision anyway, so in a practical stance it doesn&apos;t matter if it&apos;s approximate or not. The only mathematical debate of any importance is whether or not it can be considered a &quot;Normal&quot; number, an esoteric concept for anyone uninitiated. PI also comes up in quantum physics, though I&apos;m not as familiar with how they use it beyond Euler&apos;s formula. - In the case of the golden mean, we see its existence in nature as plainly as we see electromagnetic forces, light, and any other physical property. Especially in biology. So again... they are objective truths. We didn&apos;t make them up. - > What you have said about Nietsche confirms my view that he didn&apos;t want to be understood, at least among the hoi polloi like me!&#13;&#10;< - No, he was an elitist. (Not in the sense that Heidegger made him out to be, however.)