Hi Youness:
I have been posting models based on a list of properties as the
fundamental for a few years.
Hal Ruhl
At 06:36 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
>On 13 Sep., 19:44, Brent Meeker <meeke....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> > Youness Ayaita wrote:
>
>This leads to the
>2nd idea:
>We don't say that imaginable things are fundamental, but that the
>properties themselves are. This idea was also expressed by 1Z in his
>last reply ("We define imaginable things through hypothetical
>combinations of properties", Z1) and I think it's a very good
>candidate for a solution. Then, we start from S being the set of all
>properties (perhaps with the cardinality of the natural numbers). As
>above, we define {0,1}^S as the ensemble of descriptions. This would
>have the cardinality of the real numbers and could mathematically be
>captured by the infinite strings {0,1}^IN (the formal definition of
>the Schmidhuber ensemble to give an answer for Bruno).
>
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Sun Sep 16 2007 - 16:13:02 PDT