************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
? TROM (2:235/159.10) ????????????????????????????????????TROM-L ? Msg : 173 of 289 Rcv Pvt K/s Scn From : "Dustin W. Carr" 236/174.10 Wed 12 Jul 95 21:23 To : trom-l <[email protected]> Thu 13 Jul 95 06:44 Subj : The Basis of Life
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Apparently-to: [email protected] From: "Dustin W. Carr" <[email protected]> Subject: The Basis of Life I had a few ideas I thought I would share. This is just stuff I have learned since starting level 5. I am now finally on the last leg of my first time through the chart. Those of us in math and science like to create a minimal set of objects which can be combined to describe all objects of a given type. An example would be using three simple unit vectors in space to label the position every other point in space as a linear combination of these vectors. So far I have found that the 16 situations on the postulate chart can serve as a basis for life in this universe. I say this because I believe these situations satisfy the two conditions for a basis: a) every life situation can be considered as some combination of these basis situations (completeness) b) If a life situation can be completely described by any given step on the postulate failure chart, then it can in no way be described by any combination of any other steps on the chart. (orthogonality) Stephens does try to communicate this with his section on the logic of trom, but it did not come across very well to me. Some may argue about the validity of a) based on the ideas of flows, i.e. that TROM only handles 1 or 2 of the 4 flows of scn. I would like to dispute that. Consider others doing to others. Well why would this cause problems in a being's mind? One possibility would be that others are doing terrible things to others, things that we would rather not know that others are doing to others. So we have a not know postulate out there, but something is making a to be known postulate, otherwise there would not be a problem. It doesn't matter what that something is, the point is it is *other* than that which is making a to know postulate. So we have other(s) making a to be known postulate while the self makes a to know postulate. Self doing to self is similar. The point is there is one being making the receiving postulate and an other being making the originating postulate. It doesn't have to be an exclusive other. On a basic level, everything is self doing to self anyway, we just choose not to be conscious of that. (Sorry, had to throw in that. Hey, we're headed for Nirvana right, although feel free to stop off at Dhyana on the way. :-) ) Others have said that TROM would need to be run on each dynamic. I would say that the 16 basis situations when considered for a single dynamic would then constitute a sub-basis. Nothing wrong with that, except that the part of life described by this sub-basis would merely be a subset of all life, which can be described with the original basis, thus making the use of dynamics redundant. Of course it may simplify the TROM process for some to break it up into pieces like this. As an afterthought, I would say that the actual basis of life would not include the musts and mustn'ts, but would just consist of the plain old postulates. Beware of any that try to make the mind more complicated. It's a simple toy with many uses. I have grown tired of it, myself, although I try not to show disdain for those that like to keep it around. Happy TROMming, Dustin
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
