Of course.

## Advertising

They probably copied the idea off my posts here and on SL4 and wta- talk. I stated pretty clearly on numerous occasions that there was more than one way to define causality. I clearly stated on numerous occasions that physical causality was not the only kind of causality, but that there was also a 'mathematical causality' whereby math could be considered as the movements of mathematical objects through 'abstract time' (ie this is exactly the description of an abstract state machine). If that wasn't clear enough I posted a precise UML Domain Model to this list months ago and gave a clear explanation in a thread in which I pointed out the three UML modelling levels and how they related to the classes representing mathematical concepts in my domain model. The classes on the left-hand side of my diagram are physical classes. They are clearly accompanied by the mathematical classes (right hand side of my diagram). I clearly said in thread on this list that the bottom classes (Models) were represented the 'Conceptual' level (in UML modelling), the top-classes (Systems) represented the Functional level (UML), and the middle classes in my diagram (Tools) were the state-change level (UML). Based on this information you can clearly see that the right-hand classes in my diagram (representing the fields of mathematics) are equivalent to an abstract state-machine. Bottom right class (conceptual level) - Formal System (classical algorithm). Top right class (systems level) - Representational and middle right class (state change level ) - Theory Of Compuation - abstract state machine. Here is the link to the general Domain Model I posted here: http://marc.geddes.googlepages.com/MCRT_ClassDiagram.html BTW: I should point out here to readers that numerous debates still continuing on the transhumanist lists Jef frequents are already clearly resolved by my domain model and (admittedly general but still clear) explanations I've given here. Example: The debate on Extropy list over the nature of time. Clik this thread: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2007-July/036916.html Again, refer to my domain model and the explanation I gave to this list on thread on the matter some time back. My Domain model clearly reveals Barbours mistake (Barbour's thesis was that only 'B' time exists).. Whilst a time-less description of reality can be given (the 'Conceptual Level' - botttom classes in my diagram) - this description is incomplete. You need to add the 'Methods' of reality (think of reality as software). Software has both classes and methods... class attributes are timeless but class attributes alone give an incomplete description of the software system (you should think of the whole universe as a software system being modelled by UML). Add the 'Methods' of reality (represented by the classes on top row of my diagram and their implementations specified by the state-transitions represented by middle classes in my diagram) and you get 'A Time- flow. I could give numeous other examples of many long-standing puzzles my domain model clearly resolves but I will spare transhumanist pseudo-intellectuals further embarassment. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---