Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Retiring Infinity from science

I think any scientist and science has to opt for "A".

The only ways to break that are to try and break logic and you saw the problem with that or install a god deity.

As an interest aside back to you Western science and Russian science differ extremely in there backdrop mainly because of two men Andrey Andreyevich Markov and Andrey Nikolaevich Kolmogorov. Russian science operated in a very constructivist process and constructivist logic (it is slightly changing now I am told) because of the above two men in a time when Russia had many more scientists than the West. Constructivist logic became formalized into what is now called Intuitionistic logic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(mathematics)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic

You will see something common that you will see in all my science discussion in those links .

=> Intuitionistic logic are not assigned any definite truth value at all and instead only considered "true" when we have direct evidence, hence proof.

Western science backdrop is dubbed platonism because it allows freedom to proposition something may exist based on reasonable logic (That is how Hawking got away with his latest paper). The big issue is always around the definition of reasonable.

There are pro's and con's of both backdrops which I will leave to you to read if you are interested. It does however inevitably lead to some clashes between Russian and Western science who would have thought

If you do get interested in constructivism there is a really great article written by Yuri Gurevich who now works for Microsoft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Gurevich).

Most people don't get the point until section 2 warning he is very Russian and has a very dry sense of humor.

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gurevich/opera/123.pdf