Re: Summary of seed ideas for my developing TOE - 'The Sentient Centered Theo...

From: John M <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 13:23:35 -0700 (PDT)

--- Hal Ruhl <HalRuhl.domain.name.hidden> wrote:

> Hi John:
>
> I do not know if one should use the word Theory but
> what strikes me
> is the convergence I see in numerous lines of
> thought. I see my
> model as having many features in common with
> Russell's even though
> some of the differences may not be subject to
> complete
> reconciliation. I also see a place for Bruno's
> consistent histories,
> consistent extensions computational hypothesis
> approach as a sub
> component of mine. I have been made aware of
> others that fit the
> same pattern of convergence towards what appears to
> me to be a single
> simple model.
>
> The apparent convergence from such different
> starting places and
> ensuing seemingly incompatible lines of thought I
> find
> remarkable. It makes me believe that the model at
> the apex of this
> convergence is the correct one as far as we can ever
> know it.
>
> Hal Ruhl
>
That is all fine, but all those 'convergent' thinking
comes from the limited minds of present day humans.
If nature is not restricted to our understanding
(watch for the word: "UNDER") then we have no right to
speak about 'everything' (without due identification).
Similar to "possible" (which includes "our" deemed
impossibilities as well, restricted to our feeble
imagination). Even "imaginable" is a restriction.
Nature is not limited to that - as I like to think
about her. Not even in her 'logic'.

With friendly greetings from our perceived universe(?)


John M
Received on Wed Oct 05 2005 - 16:40:33 PDT