John
"Doesn't it occur to you that often the most distinct differences are opposites that define each other; positive/negative, up/down, on/off, left/right, matter/anti-matter, expansion/contraction, etc."
By definition, if A then everything else is not-A. An opposite being a specific form of not-A. I am not sure why you said this, so I will relate it back to what I said. If physical existence, then there is a possibility of not-physical existence. But it is only a logical possibility and by definition unknowable. So to be scientific we can only consider physical existence. Therefore, what is its basis. Answer: something and sequence.
"As well how can an observer be totally separate from what is being observed? Isn't there a fundamental connection required in order to make the observation"
He (or she) cannot be separate in terms of the sensory process, but are in physical reality. Input, which is physically existent, is received, and only if paths physically cross. Just like a brick wall receives light. Its just that an eye, etc, can then process it, a brick wall cannot. In fact the light, the carrier of which last interacted with a cat, now is a representation of that brick wall, should it next hit an eye.
"As I keep pointing out, you are very focused on distinctions, but fail to see any foundational importance to the connections"
No I am not. Once we are able to compare, then there just are distinctions. Indeed, it is only through the cross-referencing, etc of those distinctions that we establish what was not a distinction, ie constituted 'one' at any given point in time. And I keep saying that obviously something is causing the alteration which results in different existent states. Though I would then suggest that that something has physical existence, so we still get 'one at a time'. Which would imply that we should consider physical existence as the state of the 'properties' as at any point in time, which is what I was doing. Now, how that change comes about is another, and very important, question, but it is a different question.
"I can certainly understand that distinctions are foundational to any concept of information, but it is the connections which make it knowledge"
You first need the individual knowledge, to then gain knowledge of the distinctions, to be then able to generate knowledge on the connections.
Paul