Eleventh Assumption of Science?
Also, after re-reading your list of 10 Assumptions, I thought you might add an assumption about Scaling, e.g., "We see familiar patterns of motion repeat at various scales as we see further into the micro and macro IU". I'm sure you could do better. I don't mean to be so presumptuous with your thesis.
Thanks Rick. I always keep my eyes open for the 11th assumption of science. Once we thought it was that the universe is 3D, but we could find no suitable indeterministic opposite. Also, the 3D concept seems well explained by inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion), particularly after we define matter as things that have xyz dimensions and location with respect to other things.
Your suggestion is more prescient than you think. Maybe you picked it up from the NPA paper that Steve Puetz and I gave last year (http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_5229.pdf ). Anyway, we are nearly done with an entire book on the subject (tentative title: “Universal Cycle Theory”). Nonetheless, the cycle idea does not seem to have a suitable indeterministic opposite. Also, the concept seems to be a deduction from infinity (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions), although one could argue that infinity covers only the material part, but not the motion. Again, inseparability seems to settle the motion question as well. As you can see, the hard part about discovering fundamental assumptions is finding their indeterministic opposites. These have to lead to a “freewill” deduction and many of the ideas that have been dear to the hearts of indeterminists over the centuries.