Hi Bruno:
The idea of my model is that the foundation system has two components one
is inconsistent because it is complete - it contains all - and the other is
incomplete - it is empty of all.
These two components can not join but the incomplete one must attempt to do
so - leading to the creation of metaverses.
Hal
At 10:36 AM 7/2/2004, you wrote:
>At 10:14 01/07/04 -0400, Hal Ruhl wrote:
>>Re the discussion on mathematical realism etc. I ask for comments on
>>whether or not "definition" that is the division of "ALL" in to two parts
>>is a mathematical process.
>>
>>To me "definition" seems arbitrary but some definitions result in
>>mathematical concepts such as the one I use which results in the concepts
>>of incompleteness and inconsistency
>
> From this I can infer you are not following classical or more general
> standard logic where inconsistent theories are trivially complete in the
> sense that *all* propositions are provable (all the true one + all the
> false one!).
>This explains probably why it is hard to me to follow your post. I
>suggested to you (some years ago) to follow simpler paths, for pedagogical
>reasons. I read your posts but I have not yet a clue of what are your more
>primitive beliefs. You over-use (imo) analogies, which can be inspiring
>for some constructive path, but you don't seem to be able to realize the
>lack of clarity of your most interesting posts in that regards. I respect
>your willingness to try, and I hope my frankness will not discourage you.
>
>Bruno
>
>http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Received on Fri Jul 02 2004 - 11:00:00 PDT