Creel, Richard E.  “Continuity, Possibility, and Omniscience.”  Process Studies 12 (1982): 209-31.

Abstract:

Charles Peirce argues that a continuum is infinitely divisible and therefore cannot be comprehended by apprehension of a set of discrete individuals. Charles Hartshorne accepts this and infers from it that knowledge of possibilities is dependent upon knowledge of actualities and is necessarily vague and indeterminate--consequently even an omniscient being could not have eternal knowledge of all possibilities. I develop the concept of continuity in my argument that Peirce is correct, Hartshorne wrong. [ Abstract from The Philosopher's Index]