**Ben Goertzel** (*ben@goertzel.org*)

*Mon, 27 Sep 1999 14:56:49 -0400*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**Stephen P. King: "[time 829] Re: [time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**In reply to:**Ben Goertzel: "[time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**Next in thread:**Stephen P. King: "[time 829] Re: [time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."

*> > When one local system interacts with another it can perhaps be viewed as
*

*> > sending some kind
*

*> > of "messenger" entity to the other; thus we have a new kind of
*

*> boundary { }
*

*> > representing
*

*> > a voyager from one local system to another?
*

*>
*

*> { } here is different from the { } above representing the
*

*> universe? Or do you
*

*> mean many (local) universes exist?
*

Yikes!!! very bad. I inadvertently reused the same notation ;(

There just aren't enough parentheses in the world...

yes, my {} voyagers are different from the whole universe. The whole

universe I'll

represent by

[_ _]

In other words, this represents a global system rather than a local system

We then have

[_ _] = global system

[ ] = local system

{ } = messenger (voyager)

< > = quantum logical form

*> So you think three kinds of components for the universe? Local
*

*> systems, local
*

*> universes and the voyagers or messengers?
*

No, sorry -- global systems, local systems, messengers and (quantum) logical

forms

*> > Anyone ever build a "quantum Laws of Form" ? This would seem
*

*> to be what we
*

*> > need here.
*

*>
*

*> Yes, this is necessary to recover the world.
*

I have some ideas on this, I need to write them down

It's not hard to get quantum logic from a Laws of Form -like formalism.

The trick will be to get quantum dynamics to emerge from a simple

"re-entrant form"

or iteration on this space...

*> Is quantum boundary < > different from [ ] above?
*

The boundary [] demarcates a local system, a subjective reality

The quantum boundary <> is an elementary quantum logical operator, which may

be nested

<<>> or put side by side <> <> to yield arbitrary quantum propositions.

(By analogy

to Spencer-Brown's Laws of Form which similarly yields Boolean algebra). I

need to work

out the details, which may of course fail to work ;O

*> How are/do these three
*

*> kinds of boundary defined/work? Or what postulates do you require them to
*

*> satisfy?
*

More later!!

ben

**Next message:**Stephen P. King: "[time 829] Re: [time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**In reply to:**Ben Goertzel: "[time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."**Next in thread:**Stephen P. King: "[time 829] Re: [time 827] Re: [time 825] Chu spaces, causality, local systems... quantum laws of form? ..."

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3
on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:42 JST
*