From: Joe E. Dees (jdees0@students.uwf.edu)
Date: Mon Sep 28 1998 - 19:53:53 MDT
Date sent: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:55:17 -0400
To: extropians@extropy.org
From: Ian Goddard <Ian@Goddard.net>
Subject: Re: Logic of Zero
Send reply to: extropians@extropy.com
> The anti-inquiry gangsters who deface the ExI
> list would do well to observe the mature and
> civil behavior of one Joe E. Dees:
>
> Joe E. Dees (jdees0@students.uwf.edu) wrote:
>
> >> > IAN: Change is defined by its displacement from zero
> >> > change. If a system anticipates its change, it must
> >> > use "no change" as a hypothetical point of measure
> >> > the deviation from which defines a state of change.
> >> > So zero is implicit in the measurement you speak of.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's a tricky definition of change but it's not the only one,
> >> e.g., FPGA circuits can be made to work without ever using zero.
>
>
> IAN: If you cannot measure no (zero) change, from what
> do you differentiate change? An EPGA is a set of logic
> gates on a chip with no exact order or structure, but
> what is the FPGA-circuit-definition of change? Also,
> are we talking here about zero as just a digit or
> zero as a number representing digit and value?
>
> There's no change between all events in all space
> and time, and all events in all space and time;
> there is therefore zero change over all. No?
>
>
I did no such thing. Joe E. Dees
> **************************************************************
> VISIT Ian Williams Goddard --------> http://Ian.Goddard.net
> ______________________________________________________________
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:37 MST