Hi John, Le 07-janv.-08, à 18:12, John Mikes wrote (to Hal Ruhl)

## Advertising

> > Hal, > > I read your post with appreciation (did not follow EVERY word in it > though) - it reminded me of my "Naive Ode (no rhymes) of Ontology" > dating back into my "pre-Everythinglist" times, that started something > like: > > "...In the Beginning there was Nothingness ( - today I would add: > observer of itself). When it realized that it IS nothingness, that was > providing this information - making it into a Somethingness. The rest > is history. (Chris Lofting would say: it went alongside > Differentiation and Integration). > > A minor remark: I would not denigrate Mama Nature by using the word > 'bifurcation' - indicating that "only 2" chances in the impredicative > unlimited totality. > > As a second (even more minor) remark: "All possible states" sounds to > me as being restricted to the level "WE" find possible. Who "WE"? (I guess you are used to this question by me, with me = Bruno :) > Since > cave-times (I don't go further) we have encountered many things that > looked like impossible. I wonder if Bruno's unlimited Loebian Machine > considers anything 'iompossible'? Be careful. The Loebian Machine is a *machine*, that is a finite limited creature (infinitely patient though!). Now, if you agree to modelize (at least) necessity by provability and possibility by consistency, then the facts are that a sound Lobian Machine can refute, and thus can show the inconsistency of all elementary arithmetical truth. So 1=2 is impossible (inconsistent) for a lobian machine. More weird is the fact that there is NO propositions that a Lobian Machine can show possible !!! Even the arithmetical obvious fact that 1 = 1 cannot be shown possible, that is consistent, by the sound Lobian Machine. This is a direct consequence of Godel's second incompleteness (with the completeness theorem in the background). No proposition beginning by consistent, like Dt, which I have also written <>t, or ~B~f or ~[]~t, or ~[]f) can be proved by the sound machine (G does not prove any such proposition, but most are true, and peoved by G*). > > Have a good 2008 I wish you the best, 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---