Re: The "Group-Entity" Illusion

Ian Goddard (
Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:45:17 -0500

At 10:59 AM 1/20/99 -0700, wrote:

> IAN: A stone is an object, and as I understand,
> it's composed of "a collection of objects" known
> as molecules, atoms, and subatomic entities; which
> directly falsifies your claim that "a collection
> of objects can't itself be a physical object."
>Perhaps I should've written "mere collection of objects". A stone is
>emphatically *not* just a "collection" (a mental grouping or association)
>but a coherent whole that responds to changes as a unit. You can kick it,
>you can stub your toe on it. You can't kick a mere collection of things,
>such as "all the rocks in the universe".

IAN: When I hit a baseball, all of the (atomic) objects it's a collection of stick together due to the electromagnetic force that holds them together. In the same way, objects like the rocks that compose the earth are held together by the gravitational force. While the electromagnetic force is stronger, the difference is only a matter of degree. So the proposition that there is no "entity" connection between objects in the universe is manifestly untrue.

> IAN: And the "complex relational nexus"
> is the "collective entity." I think that
> the case to the contrary is just semantics.
>I'll agree to disagree. "Just semantics" discounts the importance of
>careful language usage IMO, but have it your way.

IAN: I've made a crystal clear definition: "a 'collective entity' is the ordering of individuals in a system." Clearly, the ordering of objects, from atoms, to amino acids in the DNA chain, to
dots in a photograph, define
distinct entity-identities
that are "collective entities."

Collective entity A = {RDIB}
Collective entity B = {BIRD}

The ordering of the same letters yields what are two distinct entities. Any who disagree should consider that even the slightest change in the DNA sequence will result in a distinct entity.

These entities may or may not be definable as "illusions," but we can measure their existence just as well as we can measure the difference between "rdib" and "bird." In my book, if it exists then it's real.

Visit Ian Williams Goddard ------>

(+) Something can come from nothing, if, and only if, (-) (-) that something is equal to nothing ((-)+(+) = 0). (+)

"[I]n any closed universe the negative gravitational energy cancels the energy of matter exactly. The total energy, or equivalently the total mass, is precisely equal to zero."