On Mon, 27 May 2013 10:51:48 -0400, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <LBOnt.9292$kF.email@example.com>, on 05/24/2013 > at 06:48 PM, benj <firstname.lastname@example.org> said: > >>Well, indetectable things are certainly a waste of brain cells. Any >>experiments postulated or performed are truly futile because no positive >>results can ever occur. > > False, The fact that a postulated entity is indetectable does not > necessarily mean that its existence has no observable consequences. A > classical example is the deep inelastic scattering experiments, which > appear to confirm virtual gluons in hadrons. > > But what does this have to do with Mathematics?
We are talking about undetectable reality. Obviously ALL math is undetectable. Indetectable certainly does mean no observable consequences. Words actually mean things. If there are some sort of secondary consequences then obviously that is detectability.
But it is interesting to draw the line between indetectable reality, and unreal fantasy (mathematics). Nobody can detect the square root of minus one or even "2" for that matter, yet as an analogy to reality that sort of thing has proven more fruitful than one might expect for fantasy.