the non algorithmic nature of reality?

I think its an interesting argument. Vectors aren’t there until you call them – hence not made of numbers/algorithms.

Another argument that I think might be valid is that of calling something what it is and the link to abstract. One of the driving energies in the development of abstraction in painting, was the idea that the surface is 2d and a painting should be true to itself – hence 2d.
Is it not similar as with numbers? I call x vector 1/2, but in fact, it isn’t. Its just a possible interval on a surface that we might fancy translating into something we use as a function.

One Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.