# Re: No(-)Justification Justifies The Everything Ensemble

```Hi Youness:

Bruno has indeed recommended that I study in more detail the
underlying mathematics that I may be appealing to.  The response that
I have made may be a bit self serving but at this point in my life I
am having difficultly adding yet another area of skill to my resume.```
```
This notwithstanding I present below the current state of my model
[surely an informal one] which is a combination of previous posts.

-----

"List of all properties: The list of all possible properties
objects can have.  The list can not be empty since there is at least
one object: A Nothing.  A Nothing has at least one property -
emptiness.  The list is most likely at least countably infinite and
is assumed herein to be so.  Any list can be divided into two
sub-lists - the process of defining two objects - a definitional
pair.  The set of all possible subsets of the list is a power set and
therefore uncountably infinite.  Therefore there are uncountably
infinite objects."

One sub list would identify the "Nothing" having the property "empty".

There is no reason to create a multi-layered system distinguishing
between a sub list and the object it identifies.

The list itself, being a particular sub list, is therefore an object
with properties - so the list is a member of itself.

This nesting yields an infinite number of "Nothings".

A "Nothing" is incomplete since it can not resolve any question but
there is one it must resolve - that of its own duration.  So it is
unstable - it eventually "decays" [Big Bang] into a something that
follows a path to completion by becoming an ever increasing sub
division of its list - that is, it becomes an evolving object - an
evolving universe.

Since there is an infinite number of "Nothings" we have a multiverse.

Some such paths to completion will have SAS, "Inflation" and "Dark
energy" which are expressions of the information flow dynamics
resulting from the particular completion dynamics.

The completion path is naturally random but always grows in
information.  Very large completion steps should be less common than
smaller ones so SAS - if present - would therefore mostly "observe"
small changes.

Hal Ruhl

At 02:22 AM 9/17/2007, you wrote:

>Thank you for this remark, Hal. Indeed, you mentioned very similar
>ideas:
>
>"List of all properties: The list of all possible properties
>objects can have.  The list can not be empty since there is at least
>one object: A Nothing.  A Nothing has at least one property -
>emptiness.  The list is most likely at least countably infinite and
>is assumed herein to be so.  Any list can be divided into two
>sub-lists - the process of defining two objects - a definitional
>pair.  The set of all possible subsets of the list is a power set and
>therefore uncountably infinite.  Therefore there are uncountably
>infinite objects."
>
>But your theories are much more complex than that if my first
>impression is correct. Sooner or later, I'll give attention to them in
>more detail.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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