Ronald,
On 18 Aug 2009, at 14:14, ronaldheld wrote:
>
> I have heard of Octonians but have not used them.
> I do not know anything about intelligible hypostases
Have you heard about Gödel's provability (beweisbar) predicate bew(x)?
If you have, define con(x) by ~bew ('~x') (carefully taking into
account the Gödel numbering). Con is for contingent, or consistent.
Then the logic of the intelligible matter hypostases are given by the
predicate Bew(x) & Con(x)
(The sensible, non intelligible, hypostases, cannot be defined by a
predicate, and some detour in Modal logic is necessary, but for each
arithmetical propositions p, you can define them by Bp & Dp & p. (Dp
is ~B ~p, Bp is bew('p'))
Note that Bp & Dp & p is "obviously" equivalent to p, for any correct
machine, but no correct machine can see that equivalence, and this is
a consequence of incompleteness).
You can read my Plotinus paper for more, if interested.
You can also read Plotinus II, 4: "On Matter". Plotinus took Aristotle
not quite Platonist theory of matter, and recasted it in
"his" (neo)Platonist doctrine.
Basically, matter, for Aristotle---Plotinus is what is indeterminate.
If fits well with comp where matter is the indeterminate computations
which exist below the comp substitution level (by step 7).
I have not really the time to say much more for now, and this is in
AUDA, and it is better to get UDA straight before. I think.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Tue Aug 18 2009 - 16:46:38 PDT