Hi John: My intent is to eventually "back fill" the compacted description with additional discussion once I think it is OK. Perhaps that will help. In that regard I currently want information to be a divisor and packets of divisors to be a division of the [A-Inf]. I am trying to avoid the central use of the words "information" and "meaning". I redid the compact form along these lines and I put it below for easy reference. I am also attempting to avoid or at least minimize appeal to math such as that associated with sets. I hope there will not be much more to revise before I attempt a slightly longer discussion.
I am an engineer but I will try to make the added discussion more universal if that is the right word. However, I am looking for a lattice upon which to build that discussion. Interconnection is a main theme since the S(i) are intersected or should be [incompleteness] by the Q(i). Are "aspects" also types of "distinctions"? Information could be called a distinguisher I suppose, but I currently prefer "divisor" as in that which lies between, or outlines distinguishables. Hal Ruhl At 09:02 AM 2/11/2008, you wrote: >Hal, > >I lost you 2) - 13): I cannot squeeze the philosophical content into a >physicalist-logical formalism. The 'terms' are naturally vague to me, >cannot follow them 'ordered. The words in your perfect schematic are >(IMO) not adequate for the ideas they are supposed to express: our >language is inadequate for the (my?) advanced thinking. >I am for total interconnection, no separable divisions etc. Aspects, >no distinctions. >I am not ready to make a conventional scientific system out of the >inconventional. I am not an 'engineer': I am a dreamer. > >Maybe if I learned your entire vocabulary?....(I cannot - it >interferes with mine). > >Thanks for your effort, it was counterproductive FOR ME. > >I appreciate your way as your way. > >John M 1) Assume [A-Inf] - a complete, divisible ensemble of divisors and its own divisions. 2) [N(i):E(i)] are two component divisions of [A-Inf] where i is an index [as are j, k, p, r, t, v, and z below] and the N(i) are empty of any [A-Inf] and the E(i) contain all of [A-Inf]. {[A-Inf] contains itself.}{i ranges from 1 to infinity} {N(i) is the ith Nothing and E(i) is the ith Everything.} 3) S(j) are divisions of [A-Inf] that are not empty of [A-Inf]. {Somethings} 4) Q(k) are divisions of [A-Inf] that are not empty of [A-Inf]. {Questions} 5) cQ(p) intersect S(p). {cQ(p) are compulsatory questions for S(p)} 6) ucQ(r) should intersect S(r) but do not, or should intersect N(r) but can not. {ucQ(r) are un-resolvable compulsatory questions}. {incompleteness} 7) Duration is a ucQ(t) for N(t) and makes N(t) unstable so it eventually spontaneously becomes S(t). {This ucQ(t) bootstraps time.} 8) Duration can be a ucQ(v) for S(v) and if so makes S(v) unstable so it eventually spontaneously becomes S(v+1) {Progressive resolution of ucQ, evolution.} 9) S(v) can have a simultaneous multiplicity of ucQ(v). {prediction} 10) S(v+1) is always greater than S(v) regarding its content of [A-Inf]. {progressive resolution of incompleteness} {Dark energy?} {evolution} 11) S(v+1) need not resolve [intersct with] all ucQ(v) of S(v) and can have new ucQ(v+1). {randomness, developing filters[also 8,9,10,11], creativity, that is the unexpected, variation.} 12) S(z) can be divisible. 13) Some S(z) divisions can have observer properties [also S itself??]: Aside from the above the the S(v) to S(v+1) transition can include shifting intersections among S subdivisions that is communication, and copying. Hal Ruhl --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---