Hello Everyone:
Just a check of my new email account so I can resume participation.
Hal
--
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 every
Hi everyone:
Unfortunately I have been very ill for the last 15 months or so.
I am working on this project again and hope to post soon.
Hal Ruhl
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of auxon
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 3
so not be reversible for the same reason.
If correct, would [my Model,Comp] be observationally verified?
Hal
--
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, sen
Hi Bruno:
On Friday, April 4, 2014 12:36:13 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Hal,
Yes, we might be on the same length wave for the ultimate TOE,
Thank you
but your terming is rather terrible.
I will work on it, perhaps needing some help.
Today I tend to think of the current
it is “machine” is at least
one component of a correct and complete description of our observer
experience. This because I believe it to be a different expression part of
if not all of my approach. There may be other components but this may be
TBD.
On 01 Apr 2014, at 01:48, Hal Ruhl wrote
.
I see “A” and its traces as a UD.
As for the issue of the nature of life please see my draft at:
*http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/*http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/
It is a pleasure to converse with you again.
Hal
On Monday, March 31, 2014 4:12:08 AM UTC-4, Bruno
Hi Liz:
A number can be interpreted as encoded information. The decoder can even be
a segment of the number.
Hal
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 7:53 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
posts], then how does this impact the
Everything since I see it as a restriction [selection] on the scope of
possible universes?
Comments welcome.
Thanks
Hal Ruhl
DEFINITIONS:
i) Distinction:
That which enables a separation such as a particular red from other colors.
ii
it if it is shown to be
unrealistic] so I would deeply appreciate comments on it.
Hal Ruhl
On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 9:28:15 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:44:17PM +1300, LizR wrote:
Yes, I think that's what Carl Sagan said about the possibility of life
such processes will be implemented in any universe in which
they are possible. Since entropy has a fixed maximum in a closed system (a
universe) then life must enable its own extinction.
Yours
Hal
On Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:23:58 PM UTC-4, JohnM wrote:
Dear Hal Ruhl,
it has been for long since
always inherently self
destructive wherever it appears in any allowed universe then why is there
such a down select in the types of allowed universes.
-
*http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/*http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/
Hal Ruhl
--
You
does this lack of choice influence the origin and
structure [if this is a reasonably applicable term] of the Everything.
Hal Ruhl
On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 11:18:57 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 11 Feb 2014, at 03:57, LizR wrote:
On 11 February 2014 15:22, Hal Ruhl hal
/18/2013] is at
http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/
Hal Ruhl
--
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
and thus
unavoidable extinction event built into life and it is fully effective
absent an unnatural earlier one.
Hal Ruhl
On Monday, February 10, 2014 8:33:08 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
It certainly isn't natural at the rate we've been doing it. We're coming
close to a cometary impact
do make allowance for such a possibility.
See the material I pointed to: http://arobustfuturehistory.wordpress.com/
Hal Ruhl
--
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
On Monday, February 3, 2014 3:58:07 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:09:00AM -0800, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Russell and everyone
My personal archive goes back to March of 2008 if there might be
something
in there that could help a wiki
for the list but the
project died.
Hal Ruhl
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2014 5:38 PM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: A humble suggestion to the group
started a FAQ for the list but the
project died.
Hal Ruhl
-Original Message-
From: *everything-list@googlegroups.com* everything-list@googlegroups.com[
*mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com* everything-list@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Sunday, January
Hi Roger :
Then Try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send
Hi Roger :
Try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_distribution_in_the_United_States
Then Try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Hi Roger:
Try this and sort by wealth Gini
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_distribution_of_wealth
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
Hi Roger :
Try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_distribution_in_the_United_States
Then Try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States
Hal
Sorry if this posts more than once - some of my posts just
should be a suitable proxy for perceived quality of life. The fly
in the ointment - there seems to always be at least one - is by (3)
and (4) the monotonic reduction in the ability to do work in that
biosphere.
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
currently rewriting the early post to improve
clarity.]
John: I think my response to Stephen re his finite resolution. responds to
your post also.
Hal
AFAIK, there is no requirement for resource consumption to be proportional
to GDP. So it should be possible to save the economy without
currently rewriting the
early post to improve clarity.]
John: I think my response to Stephen re his “finite resolution…”
responds to your post also.
Hal
AFAIK, there is no requirement for resource consumption to be
proportional to GDP. So it should be possible to save the economy
without
Hi Roger:
Roger: Talk to Dawkins. The purpose of the gene is to create more genes. So
the purpose of life (at a minimum) is to create more life.
Response from Hal: No. Life creates more life in compliance with pAP1.
A reasonable result is one heck of a mass extinction. Repeat until
://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/everything-list
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Clough
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 8:42 AM
To: everything-list
Subject: Re: RE: Re: Life: origin
.
Therefore I propose to change heat death to operative heat death re your
finite resolving power for observers. This should allow for the
possibility of an open universe.
I am also considering changing purpose of life to function of life.
Thanks
Hal
Dear Hal,
What consequences would
someone can falsify
pAP1.
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
suspect
that each individual life entity upon sufficiently close inspection will be
found to be as well.
Further the environment necessary for life to arise as I propose and be
sustainable is hardly random.
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything
/2012 11:40 AM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Stephen:
pAP1 is #8 of the discussion initiating posts
8) Conclusion (2): Once life is present it will immediately punch as
many holes in as many Energy Hang-up Barriers as the details of the
particular life entity involved allows - this is how it realizes its
Hi Roger:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Clough
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 6:09 AM
To: everything-list
Subject: Re: Re: Life: origin, purpose, and qualia spectrum
Hi Hal,
Just look
. This is the purpose of life herein. In other words
life's purpose is to hasten the heat death of its host universe.
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Hi Roger:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Clough
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 11:06 AM
To: everything-list
Subject: Consciousness = life = intelligence
Hi Hal Ruhl
Consciousness = life
Hi Everyone:
Here are some expansions on my prior post regarding the following three
topics:
i) Consciousness: Define it for now as the detection by a life entity of the
current system energy configuration both internal and external to the life
entity sufficient to ensure its adherence to its
Hi John:
See my 11/4/12 @ 4:43PM post on life re proposal ii - freewill precluded.
Hal Ruhl
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:57 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re
on the field or a
pruning.
This discussion is important to where I want to take my posts.
Thanks
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen P. King
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 12:09 PM
To: everything
Hi Everyone:
I would now like to expand the discussion re the two current conclusions in
the slightly edited version of the first post [below] as follows:
i) Consciousness: The origin and purpose of life herein leads me to believe
that consciousness is distributed across life entities in
Hi Everyone:
I would now like to expand the discussion re the two current conclusions in
the slightly edited version of the first post [below] as follows:
i) Consciousness: The origin and purpose of life herein leads me to believe
that consciousness is distributed across life entities in
Hi Stephen:
-Original Message-
Hi Hal,
Could it be that information is being created and forcing the
physical universe to make room for its instantiation? After all, space
is not a conserved quantity!
[HH] I think that what you mention is at least part of the source
and possibly a revision of
the above.
Thanks again for your comments.
Hal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email
/2012 9:48 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Everyone:
I would like to restart my participation on the list by having a
discussion regarding the aspects of what we call life in our
universe starting in a simple manner as follows: [terms not defined
herein have the usual Laws of Physics definition]
1
:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Let me refer you to a very old paper of mine:
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/life.html
I took a quick look. I may need some help understanding it fully. I
occasionally play with the idea that Dark Energy is a spatially
uniform leak of information
, purpose, and qualia spectrum
On 11/2/2012 4:27 PM, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Let me refer you to a very old paper of mine:
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/life.html
I took a quick look. I may need some help understanding it fully. I
occasionally play with the idea that Dark Energy
Hi Everyone:
I would like to restart my participation on the list by having a discussion
regarding the aspects of what we call “life” in our universe starting in a
simple manner as follows: [terms not defined herein have the usual “Laws of
Physics” definition]
1) Definition (1): Energy (E)
of QM in many universes] is allowed within my model but is not
the only descriptor of universe evolution. Many evolving universes may
contain no such computational component.
Hal Ruhl
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
a substantially
increased level of comprehension of economics which is actually a result of
any local physics. I can't accomplish this re most of Bruno's work since I
am definitely not adequate in the relevant logic disciplines.
Hal Ruhl
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything
Hi Brent:
I shall try to respond tomorrow.
Hal Ruhl
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 8:41 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: The limit of all computations
On 5/23
.
Thus I see the model as containing, but not limited to, comp.
Well, the model is still a work in progress.
Hal Ruhl
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
I believe Stephen Gould indicated evolution was a random walk with a lower
bound. It seems reasonable that the longest random walk would more or less
double in length more or less periodically i.e. exponential growth.
Hal Ruhl
_
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Hi Everyone:
I have not posted for awhile but here is the latest revision to my model:
Hal Ruhl
DEFINITIONS: V k 04/03/10
1) Distinction: That which describes a cut [boundary], such as the cut
between red and other colors.
2) Devisor: That which encompasses a quantity
on the list. This
seems extremely insufficient. Thus I suspect that despite my real interest
in developing an alternative means of communication for my ideas in this
area, my primary reliance for communicating the model will unfortunately
have to remain using as small a set of words as I can muster.
Hal
. If
we are forced to attribute consciousness to sequences of events which
occur purely by luck, then causality can't play a significant role. This
is the rather surprising conclusion which I reached from these musings
on Boltzmann Brains.
Hal Finney
, this lack of clarity seems to have been useful given your
discussion of inconsistency driven traces. I had not considered this
before.
Yours
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-l...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Abram Demski
Sent: Monday
to my approach. Is it a UD?
Hal,
Is there a pattern to how the system responds to its own
incompleteness? You say that there is not a pattern to the traces, but
what do you mean by that?
---
That is not what I actually said. I indicated that there were no
restrictions on the copy
on the outputted
divisors.
The output of new copies of the incomplete Divisor and splitting traces
dovetails the dynamic.
I think this contains a UD but the unrestricted nature of the traces seems
to makes it more than that.
Yours
Hal
-Original Message-
From: everything-l
Hi Jonni:
How does this affect the site? I was hoping to use it this winter.
Yours
Hal Ruhl
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jonni jemp
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: everything wiki
hi
to be SAS.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
during the S(i) to S(i+1)
transition.
12) The selector mechanism can be the simplest possible or be an ensemble of
components ranging from simple to very complex. Some could be complex
enough to be SAS.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
from this derivation
consciousness is not a requirement in order to have a process but may be
present. Also from this derivation, the process is an inseparable part of
the system.
Hal Ruhl
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Russell
to be information processing.
I will accept that for now.
Importantly it seem to move the two points of view closer together
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group
). It would be interesting to see how
different the perspective is.
Indeed.
Hal Ruhl
--
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics
UNSW SYDNEY 2052
Hi Russell:
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 09:35:47PM -0500, Hal Ruhl wrote:
Hi Russell:
In response to Jason you wrote:
An OM is a state of a machine. In as far as the machine is embedded
in space, the the OM is spread across space. Successive OMs involve
state change,
In my model
direction.
I agree.
Of course this finite amount of time will be
observer dependent,
How do you mean that. I do not see that state dwell duration differs within
a given universe. I also do not see a fixed value even for a particular
universe.
Hal Ruhl
be [incompleteness] by the Q(i).
Are aspects also types of distinctions? Information could be
called a distinguisher I suppose, but I currently prefer divisor as
in that which lies between, or outlines distinguishables.
Hal Ruhl
At 09:02 AM 2/11/2008, you wrote:
Hal,
I lost you 2) - 13): I cannot
.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
[A-Inf] All Information.
Well its a first try.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
aspects of the information dynamic
appear to originate from the history of the dynamic for a particular
Something and its resultant current incompleteness.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed
the
Everything or in/of any of its sub sets.
Hal Ruhl
At 07:48 AM 1/20/2008, you wrote:
George and Hal:
Why does a question emerge? Why does it 'imply' to be answered? (I
avoid 'why do we feel') Where did 'incompleteness' occur from?
All these are very 'human' concepts and we impersonate them
Hi George:
I see no feeling of anything in a Something. There is only an
absence of the information needed to answer meaningful questions that
are asked and must is be answered.
Hal Ruhl
At 11:13 PM 1/17/2008, you wrote:
Hal,
Allright. You are saying that incompleteness is the (only
Hi George:
I see no motivator to any dynamics within the Everything other than
the incompleteness of some of its members and the unavoidable
necessity to progressively resolve this incompleteness.
Hal Ruhl
At 12:29 AM 1/17/2008, you wrote:
Hal Ruhl wrote:
This is an automatic process
for any sub
component of the Something including what one might call an
observer. I may need to reconsider when I get to that point in
Russell's book but my time restraints force me to take considerable
time doing so.
Hal Ruhl
At 02:21 PM 1/16/2008, you wrote:
Hi Hal,
This topic interests me
Hi George:
At 09:59 PM 1/16/2008, you wrote:
Hal,
I cannot follow you: one the one hand you say:
Something if incomplete will have to
increase its completeness to answer meaningful questions
This is an automatic process like a mass has to answer to the forces
[meaningful questions] applied
of a Something inside the Everything
increases as the quest progresses.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
Hi John:
At 04:01 PM 1/8/2008, you wrote:
Hi, Hal: - Hopefully without risking strawmanship, a further remark
on our humanly limited language (however infiltrating into the
'meaning' of texts):
HR:
... What I indicated was all paths to completion.
JM:
does anything like 'completion' make
Hi John:
At 12:12 PM 1/7/2008, you wrote:
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
in this venue.
There would be only one possible maximum size transitions and many
possible small ones.
In this approach large transitions that resemble White Rabbits would
be uncommon and patternless White Rabbit events should not exist.
Hal Ruhl
over and over forever.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
Wei Dai writes:
I promised to summarize why I moved away from the philosophical position
that Hal Finney calls UD+ASSA. Here's part 1, where I argue against ASSA.
Part 2 will cover UD.
Consider the following thought experiment. Suppose your brain has been
destructively scanned and uploaded
data strings have
their meaning implicitly within themselves, because there is no
reasonable-length program that can interpret them as anything else.
Hal Finney
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything
it's possible they might get somewhere.
But at this point it looks like the resistance is too strong. Rather
than string theory making the multiverse respectable as we might hope,
it seems likely that the multiverse will kill string theory.
Hal Finney
measure. In the UDASSA model that
I prefer, OM measure is essentially the sum of the measures of all
programs that output that OM. If two universes instantiate it, both
contribute measure to it (as do Boltzmann brains, demons with boxes,
Matrixes and other simulators, etc.).
Hal Finney
[By the way, I notice that I do not receive my own postings back in email,
which makes my archive incomplete. Does anyone know if there is a way to
configure the mailing list reflector to give me back my own messages?]
Russell Standish wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 12:10:33PM -0700, Hal Finney
Stathis Papaioannou writes:
On 20/09/2007, Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lifetime formulation also captures the intuition many people have
that consciousness should not jump around as observer moments are
created in the various simulations and scenarios we imagine in our
[I want to first note for the benefit of readers that I am Hal Finney
and no relation to Hal Ruhl - it can be confusing having two Hal's on
the list!]
Rolf Nelson writes:
UDASSA (if I'm interpreting it right, Hal?) says:
1. The measure of programs that produce OM (I am experiencing A, and
I
Hi Marc:
The objects I use are divisions of the list - such divisions are
static elements of the power set.
My objects have nothing to do with programing and do not change -
they can be the current state of a something on its path to completion.
Hal
At 12:13 AM 9/18/2007, you wrote
or another resolution of a meaningful
question the current system has insufficient content to otherwise
resolve. So the process is mathematical but not mathematical
system specific. By duration re the Nothing I do not intend a time
factor but something more like a resource.
Hal Ruhl
- 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
Hi Youness:
I have been posting models based on a list of properties as the
fundamental for a few years.
Hal Ruhl
At 06:36 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
On 13 Sep., 19:44, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Youness Ayaita wrote:
This leads to the
2nd idea:
We don't say that imaginable
://www.nabble.com/UDist-and-measure-of-observers-tf3056759.html
Hal
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
question of
whether we are conscious may after all be something that we could be
mistaken about.
Hal
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL
program the AI to say this,
and to believe it (in whatever sense that word applies), but is it
something an AI could logically conclude?
Hal
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group
Stathis Papaioannou [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 01/06/07, Hal Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reference to Susskind is a paper we discussed here back
in Aug 2002, Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant,
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0208013 . The authors argued
of the universe. A measure concept related to information
might therefore reduce the measure of such brains to insignificance.
Hal Finney
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post
. The inconsistency is inherited by the
dynamic so the dynamic has a random content.
All levels of randomness of trips to completeness are allowed.
A UD trace if I understand it correctly would be equivalent to a
Nothing on a reasonably monotonic trip to completeness.
Yours
Hal Ruhl
At 12:10 PM 2/20
Hi Bruno:
At 05:43 AM 2/19/2007, you wrote:
Le 18-févr.-07, à 03:33, Hal Ruhl a écrit :
Hi Bruno:
In response I will start with some assumptions central to my approach.
The first has to do with the process of making a list.
The assumption is:
Making a list of items [which
related successions are allowed. Successions
displaying any degree of randomness are also allowed.
I would like to finish the walk through of my
model before discussing white rabbits and observation.
Yours
Hal Ruhl
At 09:49 AM 2/12/2007, you wrote:
Hi Hal,
Le 12-févr.-07, à 03:37, Hal Ruhl
Hi John:
This is what brought me to the idea that while
all objects have simultaneous existence they
also can have degrees of hyper existence. Hyper
existence is like a tag that indicates states
that are, those that are becoming, and those
that have recently been [so to speak].
Hal Ruhl
Hi Jason:
I want to thank you for you work re a centralized place to keep the
various essences of the list and their variations.
Hal Ruhl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group
are present.
Hal Ruhl
At 04:23 AM 2/9/2007, you wrote:
Le 07-févr.-07, à 02:45, Hal Ruhl a écrit :
Given an uncountably infinite number of objects generated from a
countably infinite list of properties and an uncountably infinite
number of UD's in the metaphor I can not see an issue
1 - 100 of 644 matches
Mail list logo
