On 12 January 2014 18:33, Stephen Paul King <stephe...@provensecure.com>wrote:

> Dear LizR,
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 12:00 AM, LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 January 2014 14:52, Stephen Paul King 
>> <stephe...@provensecure.com>wrote:
>>> Dear LizR,
>>>   That is the claim and I show that it is false. A class that has a
>>> particular set of properties and not the rest of the properties required to
>>> "balance it all out to Nothing" is not neutral. It is biased!
>> So, can't arithmetic be balanced out to nothing? What can?
> Of course arithmetic be balanced out to nothing! By the class of physical
> objects and their actions! They are what it isn't. Is this not making
> sense? I don't see how it is complicated...
> I must admit to being a little confused.

Brent said

"everything is arithmetic" IS neutral monism:

You appeared to disagree. But then you said "Of course arithmetic be
balanced out to nothing!"

I assume you meant to say it *can't *be balanced out to nothing, because
later, you said

"My claim is that arithmetic is not Nothing thus it is not neutral and
cannot be the foundation of a neutral monism."

So I'll assume that was a typo above, unless you tell me otherwise.

So, if arithmetic *isn't* capable of being "balanced out to nothing", what *is
*capable? (And what is involved in balancing out to nothing, anyway?)

I'll have a stab at what "BOTN" may involve.

I seem to recall that Russell Standish's book "Theory of Nothing" says that
all possible information = zero information --- if you have information as
bitstrings, then all possible bitstrings add up to a Library of Babel, a
collection which contains all, and hence no, information --- so that is an
example of something that "balances out to nothing".

Similarly, a multiverse in which all possible things happen "balances out
to nothing" *except for* the laws of physics that operate within it. (While
a universe in which things could have happened differently doesn't - it has
a single, definite history.)

But surely one needs some form of logic to define information, and some
form of logic to define the laws of physics?  So aren't these prior to
something *being able to* balance out to nothing?

And if so, might not arithmetic also fall into the "logically prior basket"
- i.e. be something that is required thath makes it possible for neutral
monism to exist?

(Did that make sense? I may be losing the thread here. ..)

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to