Re: dark energy

From: Hal Ruhl <>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:40:45 -0500

Hi John and George:

In my post:

"I see no motivator to any dynamics within the Everything other than
the incompleteness of some of its members and the unavoidable
necessity to progressively resolve this incompleteness."

I used "motivator" in the sense that a gas engine is a motivator of dynamics.

I use incompleteness in the sense of a lack of information.

The initial "meaningful" question concerns the duration of a
particular Nothing.

This question is inevitable and must be answered ["unavoidable
necessity"], but the Nothing can answer no questions so is incomplete
so it becomes a Something to gain information.

A Something is a sub set of the members of the Everything and is
defined by its current boundary with the Everything.

The same question will apply to Somethings: What is the duration of
the current boundary? If a Something can not answer this question it
must change its boundary [expand it into the Everything]. This is a
new Something and the expansion may not have encompassed a sufficient
general answer to this question and so the process repeats
["progressively resolve this incompleteness"].

I currently see no other dynamic motivator/process within the
Everything or in/of any of its sub sets.

Hal Ruhl

At 07:48 AM 1/20/2008, you wrote:

>George and Hal:
>Why does a "question" emerge? Why does it 'imply' to be answered? (I
>avoid 'why do we feel') Where did 'incompleteness' occur from?
>All these are very 'human' concepts and we impersonate them into a
>wider sense.
>"WE" (as Bruno asked: who is that? and I replied 'humanly thinking
>machines') still 'think' in our restricted human terms - cannot do
>otherwise - using that incomplete primitive tool (brain function)
>which in Self-reflection (consciousness? I hate that term) realizes
>its own incompleteness and projects it towards the targets of its
>So the question itself does not 'emerge': it 'imerges in our thinking.
>"Something" stands for the unidentified content - a challenge (human that is).
>And - George - yes, the English language IS broken (as are all other
>ones, maybe the English - as a mixed artifact - a bit more) because it
>stands for unclear symbols and their communication with the pretension
>of clarity. Words are restrictive tools of a restrictive
>Sorry for the holiday-breaking denigration

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Sun Jan 20 2008 - 15:41:20 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:14 PST