Re: Constraints on "everything existing"

From: James N Rose <integrity.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 06:15:24 -0800

Jean-Michel Veuillen wrote:

> Then our universe did not exist before there were
> intelligent observers in it, which is not true.
>
> I think that is better to say that all
> self-consistent mathematical structures exist.
> To restrict existence to universes containing
> SASs (self-aware structures) is not only is
> very cumbersome but leads to contradictions.
 
The stipulation that a universe involves principly,
if not fully, population by SAS's .. could be seen
as a 'restriction'. However, that only happens when
self-awareness .. as a relationship and property ..
is narrowly defined or acsribed to limited types
of organization(s) within a 'universe'.

If instead, it is a property that is relevant
to the generic class "relationship(s)", then
self-awareness becomes synonymous with

self-relationship(s).

And when -that- is the dominating and established
characteristic of 'being', then it is natural and
unavoidable .. and complete .. that some degree of
associative awareness is present and operating in
all systems in all universes.

The forms and extents may vary. The behaviors may
be more cognizable 'in' some instantiations and
relevant 'to' some instantions, but the core
phenomenon is there none the less, in -all-
instantiations.

Co-relevance. Where it is only secondary and higher
relations, through which may emerge, and via which
may be instituted .. conditional 'disconnects' ..
such that information is locally blocked and some
parts of the totality de facto exist 'numb' to
other extant 'information'; at least if that
barrier remains intact and not bridged (as is its
potential). I.e., disparate information might
be accessible if the correct transduction (transform)
arrangements are made, and translations made real.

Jamie Rose
Ceptual Institute
Received on Mon Jan 20 2003 - 09:12:35 PST