Le 28-sept.-06, à 03:32, Russell Standish a écrit :
> > I assume by hypostase, you mean the word hypostasis, the plural of > which is hypostases. Yes. "Hyposase" is the french for "hypostasis". Sorry. > > My concise Oxford dictionary defines hypostasis as "underlying > substance", as opposed to attributes which are unsubstantial. Yes. But the greek means by that "fundamental". They use "substrate" for our physicalist notion of "substance". Many people are confused by that. > > Are you claiming a system of logic (eg G or S4Grz1) is a "substance"? > And if so, what do you mean by that? I have no conception. No. G and G* are just (meta)theories about what can prove (and not prove) any self-referentially correct universal machine which introspects herself. The "substance" would be the numbers. But it just mean that comp takes the notion of (natural or entire) numbers as fundamental. It is arithmetical realism. > > The formula p->BDp is your "little abstract Schroedinger equation" is > it not? So you can now show that S4Grz1 proves the LASE, but also has > the advantage of having a Kripke frame, so provides a temporal > structure? You are almost correct. G has Kripke frames too (the one which generalizes the "Papaioannou multiverse" where there are cul-de-sac word accessible from any "observer moment"). V and V* too (where V and V* are G and G* when we ask explicitly the universal machine to postulate comp). G* and V* have "sequence of Kripke Multiverses". But, and that is what is interesting is that S4Grz have temporally-structured class of Kripke frame (Kripke multiverse). And the accessibility relation is antisymmetric making it a subjective time à-la Heraclite-Bergson-Brouwer-Prigogine manner. Then S4Grz1 (the soul + the explicit comp assumption) leads to the same structure + a symmetry at the bottom. I though that the marriage of that symmetry + the time antisymmetry would make the logic collapse, but weirdly enough, this does not happen. Technically this gives the possibility, thanks to the existence of the "intermediate logics" between intuitionist logic and classical logic to figure out an arithmetical decoherence effect between quantum intuitionist logic and classical logic. But S4Grz1 does not split under the difference between G and G* (the soul is both divine and terrestrial apparently). It means the soul is too much busy to extend itself that it has not yet the power to recognize other souls ... and fall in the intelligible and sensible "material" universe. I borrow the term "hypostasis" from the translators of Plotinus. I find it more neutral than "person point of view", and also I have found an arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus main terms which conserves all its main propositions. That is useful given that Plotinus' assertions, like all platonist if not mystical assertions, are counter-intuitive. I will try to sum up the arithmetical "hypostases" in informal english. Asap. Just now I have students coming ... Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
