Hi Georges At 07:32 AM 3/10/2006, you wrote:
>I do not understand. You are considering objects that would not >have any property at all No. The most asymmetric divisions of the list possible are those containing one property in one division and all other properties in the other division. The Nothing [properties: "empty", "consistent", "incomplete" - contains nothing] and the All [some of its properties: "contains the rest of the list", "complete", "inconsistent"]* are an object pair resulting from a [three:rest] division. *The All actually contains all the properties of the list so it contains the list as a potential sub division. > and objects that would simultaneously >have all imaginable properties? Perhaps my definition of objects from the current configuration of my model would help: Object: That which has a set of properties. Objects have an associated degree of potential physical reality. The degree is distinguished by both imperativeness and duration. Imperativeness is a measure of the number of universes that can contain - imbed - the object. Objects with an inconsistent set of properties may have zero imperativeness. Duration is a measure of the maximum number of successive states of a universe [another definition] that can imbed the object that are capable of having a non zero degree of simultaneous physical reality. Of course this is now out of the context of the rest of the description of the model. Hal Ruhl --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
