I haven't published detail yet; but although I have apparently found patterns that look like what you found (see recent posts for hints); one thing you seem to have overlooked is:

When you add so-called "unknown data": from where does this "data " come? I think I showed that in your lists of numbers version of your system that you once explained to me; that there was a complementarity required between the layers of "known " and "unknown data".

You seem to have overlooked that "as you add, so you take away"; as the "unknown data" is imagined by juggling already known patterns in new ways. Example: you know "cone", you know "horse", you know "flying": if you imagine "flying unicorn" this imagination must be logically possible such as this combination doesn't destroy the minimal requirements for the definitions of the parts?
If the definition of "horse" requires "not flying under its own power" in the dictionary; then one
would break down that definition if one added unknown data that allowed the horse to fly?

If the combination destroys the definition of the parts (this example not so good as there appears room enough in the parts to postulate the possibility of their combination?) then what?

At a minimal level it does seem that any "added data" must be at least vaguely connected already to the "known" in "logical possibility space"?

The ways these patterns are juggled to generate "unknowns" must be complementary and not contradict the knowns; or you will be destroying the integrity of the knowns in the process of adding alleged unknowns?

Full internal transparency (self-knowledge; consciousness of freedom and the law of non-contradiction) allows one to go anywhere without tripping over?

It is said "as you judge, so you are judged"; writing a dictionary means writing down relative constraints among the entries?

-dolphin

• No - harvey1 - May 17, 2003 - 14:57 UTC
  • Harv - quiet - May 17, 2003 - 18:25 UTC
    • No - harvey1 - May 17, 2003 - 19:24 UTC
      • Harv - dolphin - May 18, 2003 - 04:16 UTC
        • Is Harv okay? - quiet - May 18, 2003 - 04:30 UTC
          • sure - dolphin - May 18, 2003 - 05:22 UTC
            • question for quiet - dolphin - May 18, 2003 - 05:30 UTC
              • please show me if an error here - dolphin - May 18, 2003 - 05:42 UTC
                • Yes, you upset me - harvey1 - May 18, 2003 - 12:43 UTC
              • show me the links and I might respond by email - carefuluniverse - May 19, 2003 - 02:17 UTC
                • thankyou - dolphin - May 19, 2003 - 05:06 UTC
                  • wha' th'... ? - quiet - May 19, 2003 - 21:14 UTC
                    • sorry quiet: a simple mixup there - dolphin - May 19, 2003 - 23:30 UTC
              • oopes, I missspelleed etiquette - carefuluniverse - May 19, 2003 - 02:18 UTC
          • No, I'm not - harvey1 - May 18, 2003 - 12:47 UTC
            • ??? - dolphin - May 19, 2003 - 06:39 UTC
              • Don't do that please - harvey1 - May 19, 2003 - 11:20 UTC
                • just puzzlement - dolphin - May 19, 2003 - 23:41 UTC
                  • then solve the puzzle - harvey1 - May 20, 2003 - 00:19 UTC