Of course.
They probably copied the idea off my posts here and on SL4 and wta-
talk. I stated pretty clearly on numerous occasions that there was
more than one way to define causality. I clearly stated on numerous
occasions that physical causality was not the only kind of causality,
but that there was also a 'mathematical causality' whereby math could
be considered as the movements of mathematical objects through
'abstract time' (ie this is exactly the description of an abstract
state machine). If that wasn't clear enough I posted a precise UML
Domain Model to this list months ago and gave a clear explanation in a
thread in which I pointed out the three UML modelling levels and how
they related to the classes representing mathematical concepts in my
domain model. The classes on the left-hand side of my diagram are
physical classes. They are clearly accompanied by the mathematical
classes (right hand side of my diagram). I clearly said in thread on
this list that the bottom classes (Models) were represented the
'Conceptual' level (in UML modelling), the top-classes (Systems)
represented the Functional level (UML), and the middle classes in my
diagram (Tools) were the state-change level (UML). Based on this
information you can clearly see that the right-hand classes in my
diagram (representing the fields of mathematics) are equivalent to an
abstract state-machine. Bottom right class (conceptual level) -
Formal System (classical algorithm). Top right class (systems level)
- Representational and middle right class (state change level ) -
Theory Of Compuation - abstract state machine.
Here is the link to the general Domain Model I posted here:
http://marc.geddes.googlepages.com/MCRT_ClassDiagram.html
BTW: I should point out here to readers that numerous debates still
continuing on the transhumanist lists Jef frequents are already
clearly resolved by my domain model and (admittedly general but still
clear) explanations I've given here.
Example: The debate on Extropy list over the nature of time.
Clik this thread:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2007-July/036916.html
Again, refer to my domain model and the explanation I gave to this
list on thread on the matter some time back. My Domain model clearly
reveals Barbours mistake (Barbour's thesis was that only 'B' time
exists).. Whilst a time-less description of reality can be given (the
'Conceptual Level' - botttom classes in my diagram) - this description
is incomplete. You need to add the 'Methods' of reality (think of
reality as software). Software has both classes and methods... class
attributes are timeless but class attributes alone give an incomplete
description of the software system (you should think of the whole
universe as a software system being modelled by UML). Add the
'Methods' of reality (represented by the classes on top row of my
diagram and their implementations specified by the state-transitions
represented by middle classes in my diagram) and you get 'A Time-
flow. I could give numeous other examples of many long-standing
puzzles my domain model clearly resolves but I will spare
transhumanist pseudo-intellectuals further embarassment.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Wed Jul 18 2007 - 01:49:22 PDT