Re: Properties of observers

From: Hal Ruhl <>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:19:44 -0500

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:

>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].

4) Q(k) are divisions of [A-Inf] that are not empty of [A-Inf].

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}.

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).

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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Mon Feb 11 2008 - 21:20:38 PST

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