Hi Jack; On the question of time - introduced by you and highlighted by
JO-H - and defining reality - it ain't the only problem.
On the question of the binary nature of reality - it may or may not be
"particulate" so to speak, but may be a continuum, thus not either "A or
nonA" but conditions of becoming. Zeno's paradox deals with this.
I don't know if this adds to your confusion or reduces it, but what the hey?!
Malcolm
"I was looking for a job when I got this one"
At 03:34 PM 11/3/02 -0800, you wrote:
From: Malcolm Stebbins <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: CS>Reality lives !!
Resent-From: [email protected]
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 22:13:38 -0800
Hi; 'Not only'. On the quantum level, time is reversible;
"instantaneous" does not depend on particulate time, such as the Bhuddist
'Kalapa' the smallest unit of time deemed possible, and avoiding the
sillophophical stuff that just begs to be thrashed on the question of
time, . . . . Existence and becoming (and un-becoming) may or may not be
'binary'. In Mathematics the open interval, f'rinstance, is a little
jolt; the interval [1 - 2), open at the upper end, never reaches "two";
there's always an infinitude of points between however-close-you-are to
"two", and "two" itself. This is similar to the race between Achilles and
the Tortoise in one sense, but avoids the issue of time. Also, If
something is not complete how can it exist? On the other hand, how can
"it" not exist, if you can tell "it" is not complete? And for a more
binary disclaimer, It's only fair I confess; I always lie: always!
Phast Phred (aka: "A")
***************************
Say WHAT?
Jack
