I think my model has a rationale for the necessary existence and 
functioning of Bruno's substitution mechanism.

I claim in my current model that the Everything and the Nothing if they are 
absent information must alternate with each other.

I model the Everything as a pattern of all patterns, each embedded pattern 
being repeated an infinite number of times.  At each manifestation of the 
Everything - since there is no history - the pattern of patterns realized 
is a random selection from all possible patterns of patterns.

Each embedded pattern seems computable.  They are at most representable by 
a countably infinite string of bits.

SAS are embedded in some isomorphisms to some embedded patterns.

So if we equate the level of substitution as the entire Everything [the 
only reasonable approach IMO] the alternation between Everything and 
Nothing looks like Bruno's substitution mechanism.  Further since each 
cycle creates a new pattern of patterns it is in effect a transporter of an 
isomorphism into a new universe.  See more on this below.

Now from here what I focus on is the mechanism of transfer of particular 
isomorphisms from imbedded pattern to imbedded pattern.  In my model I call 
the process a compare.  The isomorphism compares nearby embedded patterns 
with its set of rules and transfers to an acceptable one.  Any SAS can 
sense the compare process as alternate possible courses of action. The 
rules can have a non deterministic content.  Some alternate course of 
action choices are then a selection of one undecidable out of several that 
were pre assembled by the SAS through the necessary agent of the "do not 
care" part of the rules.  This allows the accumulation of a sense of self 
in the SAS and looks, I think,  like the fuzzy conscious state being 
discussed.  Each manifestation of the Everything is a new pattern of 
patterns - a new universe - and stirs the pot so to speak.

I argue for a non deterministic content by attempting to show that 
Chaitin's incompleteness forces the issue onto the transfer process.  This 
can be aided by Godelian incompleteness if the rule set is complex enough.

The transporter also injects a non deterministic aspect to SAS supporting 
universes since while the SAS can show that the transporter exists and 
functions it is not possible to tell when it has functioned.



Reply via email to