Dynamic was:: A question re measure {correction}

From: John M <jamikes.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:02:38 -0700 (PDT)

Hal and Russell (and whoever is interested),

in this dialogue - which I don't feel like
participating in - the word 'dynamic' is frequently
applied. Without going into more involved theories
where the term 'lives', the dictionary meaning is like
procedure involving a force or similar. My notion was
that 'time' is inevitable in a dynamic procedure (?)
Since in my 'narrative' time, space, even causality
are concepts pertinent to THIS universe and its
perception of the order we observe and try to explain,
are you contemplating the discussion on the
circumstances of THIS universe? (Mind you: I don't
deny the above terms from other universes but I do not
restrict those (any of them) to the characteristics we
use for ours).

John M

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

> Hi Russell:
>
> Correction in caps and [].
>
> More Additional comments:
>
> My definition of kernel is the information necessary
> to establish a
> particular division of the list. This requires the
> All to contain
> mostly tails if my comments in my last two posts is
> ok. The result
> of my dynamic as I see it is that specific finite
> heads are given
> moments of physical reality far more often then I
> originally
> thought. This allows more consistent histories of
> sequences of prior
> states to have consistent extensions [IN ANY GIVEN
> STEP] of the
> dynamic. Thus evolving universes with finite
> descriptions of their
> states may actually predominate.
>
> Yours
>
> Hal Ruhl
>
>
>
Received on Sun Oct 09 2005 - 15:11:22 PDT