From: Hal Ruhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: An All/Nothing multiverse model Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 23:22:40 -0500

Hi Jesse:

The All contains inconsistent FAS [we have no issue here as far as I can tell]

I'm not so sure--if your "All" does not include deterministic Turing machine computations, but only "states" of Turing machines which are visited randomly, then it seems to me that the All should not include axiomatic systems which deterministically output a series of theorems either--in analogy with isolated Turing machine states, it should just contain individual isolated theorems, and (according to your theory) visit different theorems at random. Unless by the "state" of a Turing machine you mean its final endstate after it has finished the computation, in which case maybe this could be analogous to the final set of *all* theorems that can ever be proved by a given FAS.

I'm not so sure--if your "All" does not include deterministic Turing machine computations, but only "states" of Turing machines which are visited randomly, then it seems to me that the All should not include axiomatic systems which deterministically output a series of theorems either--in analogy with isolated Turing machine states, it should just contain individual isolated theorems, and (according to your theory) visit different theorems at random. Unless by the "state" of a Turing machine you mean its final endstate after it has finished the computation, in which case maybe this could be analogous to the final set of *all* theorems that can ever be proved by a given FAS.

and thus all of the theorems of such FAS as some of the kernels of information simultaneously. [Do we have an issue here?]

Are you saying a "kernel of information" is a set of all possible theorems that a given FAS can prove?

Are you saying a "kernel of information" is a set of all possible theorems that a given FAS can prove?

This content makes the All inconsistent. [OK?]

No, I still don't understand in what sense you think the All is inconsistent, but if you can explain in concrete terms what you mean by "kernels of information" perhaps I would see what your argument is.

No, I still don't understand in what sense you think the All is inconsistent, but if you can explain in concrete terms what you mean by "kernels of information" perhaps I would see what your argument is.

Jesse