- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: H J Ruhl <HalRuhl.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:51:04 -0700

The following is a new effort to present my model in a more traditional

way.

The basic idea is that the concepts of "nothing" and "everything" [i.e. a

maximum expression of "something"] are not totally antagonistic but are

actually synergistic.

DEFINITIONS:

1) Information: The potential to parse [herein "parse" is used to mean to

divide as with a boundary].

2) Factual: A particular parsing. [like: {red, green, blue}]

3) Counterfactual: A factual [factual B] that to some degree effects the

parsing of another factual [factual A] {like: brown}. Note that a factual

that has a counterfactual is itself a counterfactual.

4) Complete set of counterfactuals: A set of counterfactuals that leaves no

member factual uneffected in any of its aspects. {like: gray}

AXIOMS:

1) A void consisting of the absence of factuals herein called the "Nothing"

exists.

2) A collection of all complete sets of counterfactuals herein called the

"Everything" exists.

3) There are no other existences at or above the level of the Everything

and the Nothing.

PROPOSITIONS:

Proposition 1: The Everything and the Nothing are counterfactuals.

Proof: The Everything is a parsing since it is a collection of a particular

kind of factual. The Nothing is a parsing since it excludes all factuals

from itself. These two parsings effect each other to some degree. The

existence of the Everything would tend to put a factual in the void and

thereby suppress the concept of the Nothing and the existence of the

Nothing would tend to suppress the necessity for the Everything - no

factuals equals no parsing potential. Thus Proposition 1 is true by

Definitions 2 & 3 and Axioms 1 & 2.

In addition to the suppression, The Everything and the Nothing also enhance

each other to some degree as follows.

Proposition 2: The Everything contains the Nothing.

Proof: True by Proposition 1 and Axioms 1, 2, & 3. Axiom 3 makes the

Everything/Nothing pair a complete set of counterfactuals.

Proposition 3: The Everything contains itself:

Proof: True by Proposition 1 and Axioms 2 and 3.

Proposition 4: The Everything is infinitely nested with itself and the Nothing.

Proof: True by Propositions 2 and 3.

Interpretation: The Everything and the Nothing form a synergistic pair -

their simultaneous existence is "easier" than either existence by itself.

Proposition 5: The nesting has a dynamic.

Proof: A fixed parsing between the Nothing and the Everything would

constitute the presence of an uneffected factual within the Everything

contradicting Axiom 2.

Possible interpretation:

Proposition 5 can be realized if the Nothing/Everything parsing "surface"

is composed of a dynamic mix of the "surfaces" of the counterfactuals

constituting the Everything. The counterfactuals on this "surface" are -

while so situated - slightly less effected than when they are remote from

this "surface". It is the patterns formed by the shifting mix of

"surface" counterfactuals that are interpreted as universes.

To support this interpretation the following axioms are incorporated into

the model.

Axiom 4: The members of a complete set of counterfactuals must be

intertwined as in a foamy fractal to sustain the effectiveness of the set.

Axiom 5: Universes sustain themselves by finding a succeeding pattern on

this "surface" that is consistent with their individual rules of state

succession as their current pattern vanishes with the dynamic.

Proposition 6: There is no restriction on the structure of the various

individual universe state succession rules.

Proof: Same form of proof as for Proposition 5.

Interpretative consequent: Some of the rules would have a "Do not care"

component in terms of the selection of a succeeding pattern. This is the

same as the rules of these universes allowing an external random oracle

input or true noise into the state succession process for such universes.

Proposition 7: All universes are subject to true noise.

Proof: Same form of proof as for Proposition 5.

Interpretation: Even if their rules have no "Do not care" component such

universes must nevertheless be subject to an external random oracle.

Hal

Received on Thu Oct 10 2002 - 20:53:54 PDT

Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:51:04 -0700

The following is a new effort to present my model in a more traditional

way.

The basic idea is that the concepts of "nothing" and "everything" [i.e. a

maximum expression of "something"] are not totally antagonistic but are

actually synergistic.

DEFINITIONS:

1) Information: The potential to parse [herein "parse" is used to mean to

divide as with a boundary].

2) Factual: A particular parsing. [like: {red, green, blue}]

3) Counterfactual: A factual [factual B] that to some degree effects the

parsing of another factual [factual A] {like: brown}. Note that a factual

that has a counterfactual is itself a counterfactual.

4) Complete set of counterfactuals: A set of counterfactuals that leaves no

member factual uneffected in any of its aspects. {like: gray}

AXIOMS:

1) A void consisting of the absence of factuals herein called the "Nothing"

exists.

2) A collection of all complete sets of counterfactuals herein called the

"Everything" exists.

3) There are no other existences at or above the level of the Everything

and the Nothing.

PROPOSITIONS:

Proposition 1: The Everything and the Nothing are counterfactuals.

Proof: The Everything is a parsing since it is a collection of a particular

kind of factual. The Nothing is a parsing since it excludes all factuals

from itself. These two parsings effect each other to some degree. The

existence of the Everything would tend to put a factual in the void and

thereby suppress the concept of the Nothing and the existence of the

Nothing would tend to suppress the necessity for the Everything - no

factuals equals no parsing potential. Thus Proposition 1 is true by

Definitions 2 & 3 and Axioms 1 & 2.

In addition to the suppression, The Everything and the Nothing also enhance

each other to some degree as follows.

Proposition 2: The Everything contains the Nothing.

Proof: True by Proposition 1 and Axioms 1, 2, & 3. Axiom 3 makes the

Everything/Nothing pair a complete set of counterfactuals.

Proposition 3: The Everything contains itself:

Proof: True by Proposition 1 and Axioms 2 and 3.

Proposition 4: The Everything is infinitely nested with itself and the Nothing.

Proof: True by Propositions 2 and 3.

Interpretation: The Everything and the Nothing form a synergistic pair -

their simultaneous existence is "easier" than either existence by itself.

Proposition 5: The nesting has a dynamic.

Proof: A fixed parsing between the Nothing and the Everything would

constitute the presence of an uneffected factual within the Everything

contradicting Axiom 2.

Possible interpretation:

Proposition 5 can be realized if the Nothing/Everything parsing "surface"

is composed of a dynamic mix of the "surfaces" of the counterfactuals

constituting the Everything. The counterfactuals on this "surface" are -

while so situated - slightly less effected than when they are remote from

this "surface". It is the patterns formed by the shifting mix of

"surface" counterfactuals that are interpreted as universes.

To support this interpretation the following axioms are incorporated into

the model.

Axiom 4: The members of a complete set of counterfactuals must be

intertwined as in a foamy fractal to sustain the effectiveness of the set.

Axiom 5: Universes sustain themselves by finding a succeeding pattern on

this "surface" that is consistent with their individual rules of state

succession as their current pattern vanishes with the dynamic.

Proposition 6: There is no restriction on the structure of the various

individual universe state succession rules.

Proof: Same form of proof as for Proposition 5.

Interpretative consequent: Some of the rules would have a "Do not care"

component in terms of the selection of a succeeding pattern. This is the

same as the rules of these universes allowing an external random oracle

input or true noise into the state succession process for such universes.

Proposition 7: All universes are subject to true noise.

Proof: Same form of proof as for Proposition 5.

Interpretation: Even if their rules have no "Do not care" component such

universes must nevertheless be subject to an external random oracle.

Hal

Received on Thu Oct 10 2002 - 20:53:54 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:07 PST
*