Michael Rabenberg

Alan wrote: (forall (m s) (if (exists (t) (and (occupies-spatial m s t) (or (= s three-dimensional-spatial-region) (= s two-dimensional-spatial-region) (= s one-dimensional-spatial-region) (= s zero-dimensional-spatial-region)))) (forall (t1 s1) (if...

Ugh--I meant "s1," not "s."

Alan wrote: (forall (x) (if (exists (t) (instance-of x fiat-surface t)) (exists (t s) (and (occupies-spatial-region x s t) (instance-of s two-dimensional-spatial-region t))))) This looks good to me.

> Regarding aggregates, there's precedent. The choice for temporal regions is that the highest dimension of a part is the dimension of the sum. I assumed something like that would...

No, I can't imagine a case in which I'd want to say there is an aggregate like that. But there'd be no contradiction in positing such an aggregate, and some...

Barry, I agree but the case I was imagining was one where an aggregate persists though the loss of one of its members (like the persistence of a school of...

I agree with John that the fact that sites are infinitely thin and 0D, 1D, and 2D continuant fiat boundaries aren't isn't great evidence that sites aren't continuant fiat boundaries....

^Mistyped. Correction: I agree with John that the fact that sites **aren't** infinitely thin and 0D, 1D, and 2D continuant fiat boundaries **are** isn't great evidence that sites aren't continuant...

> This is surely a matter of logic. Compare the fact that prime numbers don't have factors other than themselvs and 1 and non-prime numbers do isn't great evidence that...