Wiki: Mereology has been axiomatized in various ways as applications of predicate logic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate_logic> to formal ontology<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_ontology>, of which mereology is an important part. A common element of such axiomatizations is the assumption, shared with inclusion, that the part-whole relation orders <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_order>its universe, meaning that everything is a part of itself (reflexivity<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexive_relation>), that a part of a part of a whole is itself a part of that whole ( transitivity <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitive_relation>),
Richard: These assumptions apply to the Indra Pearl's of Chinese Buddhism and to Liebniz's monads. And more importantly superstring theory requires that tiny balls of 6-dmensional space exist which turn out to have the properties of reflexivity and transitivity, and therefore are candidates to be the pearls and monads. Wiki: and that two distinct entities cannot each be a part of the other ( antisymmetry <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisymmetric_relation>). Richard: It seems that neither the pearls, or monads, and certainly not the CYMs have this property. So its strickly not mereology that applies to monads and the rest. On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Roger <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote: > Hi Stephen P. King > > Mereology is part and parcel of Leibniz's system, to use a limp pun. > > 1) Although unproven, but because God is good while the world is > contingent (imperfect, misfitting), > Leibniz, like Augustine and Paul, believed that things as a whole work for > good, but unfortunately not all parts > have to be equally good. This is essentially his theodicy. > > 2). Everything is nonlocal: The monads are arranged like a tree structure > leading up to > the Supreme Monad, above which is God, causing all things to happen > and perceiving all things. > > Now Man, being near the top of the Great Chain of Being, and the > "perceptions" of each monad are being constantly and instantly > updated to reflect the perceptions all of the other monads in the universe, > So, to the degree of their logical distance from one another, > their intelligence, and clarity of vision, each monad is > omniscient. Personally I use the analogy of the holograph, > each part contining the whole, but wqith limited resolution. > > > > Roger , rclo...@verizon.net > 8/20/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so > everything could function." > > ----- Receiving the following content ----- > *From:* Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net> > *Receiver:* everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com> > *Time:* 2012-08-18, 17:34:30 > *Subject:* Re: Monads as computing elements > > Dear Roger, > > From what I have studied of Leibniz' Monadology and commentary by many > authors, it seems to me that all appearances of interactions is given > purely in terms of synchronizations of the internal action of the monads. > This synchronization or co-ordination seems very similar to Bruno's Bp&p > idea but for an apriori given plurality of Monads. I identify the > computational aspect of the Monad with a unitary evolution transformation > (in a linear algebra on topological spaces). > I have been investigating whether or not it might be possible to > define the mereology of monads in terms of the way that QM systems become > and unbecome entangled with each other. Have you seen any similar > references to this latter idea? > > > On 8/18/2012 11:58 AM, Roger wrote: > > Hi Stephen P. King > > In the end, as Leibniz puts it, you couldn't tell the difference, they > would > "seem" to have windows, but actually, since substances, > being logical entities, cannot actually interact, > they all must communicate instead through the supreme monad, > (the CPU) which presumably reads and writes on them. > > I think they are like subprograms, with storage files, > which can't do anything by themselves, but must be > operated on by the CPU according to their > current perceptions (stored state data) which > reflect all of the other stored state date in > the universe of monads. > > > Roger , rclo...@verizon.net > > > > -- > Onward! > > Stephen > > "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." > ~ Francis Bacon > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
