you are making perfect sense, and perfect non-sense as is necessarily the case for such metaphysical claims. simply put, you adopt here the viewpoint of god - of an omniscient being. only from this viewpoint could you claim with such confidence what the history of human science, religion and mysticism has to date been unable to show: the nature of reality past, present, and future.AquaRegia wrote: The argument is getting metaphysical: can an idea exist without a mind to conceive it? I maintain that after our solar system is dust and there is no one to remember French, French will no longer exist. But other planets will continue to orbit other starts according to GMm/r2, whether anyone is aware of it or not. In a sense, the universe IS math - not literature, or art, or history, or language, all of which are fantastic human inventions. Math is qualitatively different - something always there to be discovered.
Am I making any sense?
you cling to mathematics as the most of certain of all branches of knowledge, with the idea that it is somehow more fundamental, more basic, more "true" in its descriptions of "reality" (given, of course, that we jettison the ludicrous notion that math itself is reality). in this regard, Blind Willie is right on when citing Wittgenstein. contrast early Wittgenstein with late Wittgenstein and you have a valuble lesson in scepticism.
math is a productive language for describing various phenomenon. it offers rules by which the world (or "reality") may be judged to abide. it is productive to the extent that these rules predict things. but just because the universe (that is, our universe) corresponds to mathematical rules (the parts we focus on) does not mean that it is guided by mathematical rules (note the focus on agency). correlation is not causation.
so while you would be foolish to treat casually (i.e., skeptically) GMm/r2 if you want to enjoy a long life, over 1000 years of philosophy has also shown you are very foolish if not sceptical of any claims as to what constitutes the foundations of reality (even if we limit them to only "our" reality).