Afterword
Language as a Tool

T   
he universe is a complex entity when viewed from the bottom of its hierarchy of concepts. It really isn't inscrutable though. It is the simplest thing conceivable. Solving its most fundamental mysteries is certainly less difficult than, say, unraveling the "human genome".

This is because we can attack the solution from the perspective of language. There are only a few million words and if we admit that an explanatory formulation is possible within present linguistic constraints, we can proceed to toss out all those words which would be useless in that explanation.

For instance, we can toss out "gasoline" since it would not be included in a fundamental description of existence. It would be used in a much lengthier document however. But we would keep a word like "rotate".

Obviously, we will end up with just a few thousand words with which to construct our "opus maximus". Does anyone believe that just collecting these words will take much time? I hardly think that more than a few months would be required to go through all the words in the English language (if a few dozen knowledgeable people were working on it).

Now, from this list of usable words, we might construct an infinitude of explanations there being an enormous number of permutations of, say, twenty thousand word compositions.

We can wade through these permutations by looking only at those which exhibit a plan consistent with empirical evidence and offered as a system wherein words logically prior to others are given greatest prominence (in other words, the usable words must be arranged in a hierachical structure ... something which is today a philosophical no-no). Of these there are damned few. There is one on this site (disagreements to the contrary notwithstanding).
(See my tome - "Nature of Understanding" - if you have a chance. It is here relevant.)

I know by the process of "exhaustion" (i.e. nothing major left unconsidered) that the universe is fundamentally a simple integer count. You don't because it is not possible for me to transmit all the wrong ideas which frame (delimit) that conclusion. There are just too many of them. Your disagreement is both understandable and expected. It is also commendable if you are as genuinely interested in "the solution" as I am. I certainly would not take on faith someone else's ideas. I would find my own way.








I have only two last questions:

1) Do you really think that the universe is not understandable?

2) Do you really think that it is not the simplest thing ?

YES Return to Index NO









Ebtx Home Page