> -Original Message-
> From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> I wasn't referring to that snippet, but another one discussing the
> evolution of "superclusters" of galaxies. The theory predicts that the
> universe will ultimately come to be dominated by said clusters. The
> s
I wasn't referring to that snippet, but another one discussing the
evolution of "superclusters" of galaxies. The theory predicts that the
universe will ultimately come to be dominated by said clusters. The
snippet I mentioned seems to be referring to our measured velocity of
ca 600km/s in the dire
> >
> > Russell Standish wrote:
> >
> > > Anyway, it looks like we're falling into a supermassive black hole
> > > right now, but we've got about 100 billion (10^11) years
> > before we hit
> > > the event horizon. (Reported in New Scientist a couple of
> > issue ago).
>
George wrote:
> >
> > To
At 9/13/01, you wrote:
>Yes, words like "alternation" and "succession" definitely imply that time
>is involved. But you are saying that this is a timeless
>construct (like Platonia of the multiverse) ?
>
>Charles
Time as I understand the usual usage involves the concepts of fixed cycles
measur
> -Original Message-
> From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, 13 September 2001 4:35 p.m.
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: In one page or less
>
>
> Dear Charles:
>
> In response to another of your comments and to clarify:
>
> > >If nothing exists, including a
Dear Charles:
In response to another of your comments and to clarify:
> >If nothing exists, including any external time, then the
> > Everything (also
> > >known as "the Plenitude", perhaps) contains all available
> > >states as a fixed N-dimensional structure (N might well be
> > uncountable
>
Dear Charles:
The "Nothing" can not contain that much information if it is not balanced
out. If it was completely balanced then the "Somethings" would have the
same duration which would be net information in violation of the postulate.
Hal
At 9/13/01, you wrote:
>It would certainly be diffic
> -Original Message-
> From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> >I think I get it. If nothing exists, that is a state which contains some
> >information (i.e. "nothing exists"). To reduce the total
> >information content of the system to zero, the state of nothing existing
> >must be
> -Original Message-
> From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > > 2) The "Nothing" contains at least some information: Whenever it is manifest any
>question asking if it is manifest must
receive the response "yes".
> >I don't understand this bit at all, sorry!
>
> The idea here i
At 9/13/01, you wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > This is a simple and short effort to present my current
> > ideas. To aid
> > communication it is not intended to follow an established means of
> > mathematical expression. I am completel
> -Original Message-
> From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> This is a simple and short effort to present my current
> ideas. To aid
> communication it is not intended to follow an established means of
> mathematical expression. I am completely out of time so I
> hope it reads ok
This is a simple and short effort to present my current ideas. To aid
communication it is not intended to follow an established means of
mathematical expression. I am completely out of time so I hope it reads ok.
1) The single postulate is "The total system contains no information."
2) The "
Russell Standish wrote:
> Anyway, it looks like we're falling into a supermassive black hole
> right now, but we've got about 100 billion (10^11) years before we hit
> the event horizon. (Reported in New Scientist a couple of issue ago).
To avoid any scheduling conflict, I'll make sure to enter
13 matches
Mail list logo
