Hi guys, Neither CYM's nor strings physically exist-- instead, they represent things that exist. Anything in equation form is itself nonphysical, although the equations might describe something physical.
For example, if I live at 23 Main street, 23 Main Street is not my house, it is my address. Roger Clough, [email protected] 8/21/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-20, 16:21:32 Subject: Re: Leibniz's theodicy: a nonlocal and hopefully best mereology Stephan, Well I agree the CYMs are a form of substance. But there are string theories where the background spacetime is flexible, to use a common term. So that is not a theory limitation. The frozen block approximation allows for certain solutions that the flexible spacetime inhibits.? I do think the CYMs are flexible since according to string theorists they contain the the laws and constants of physics allowing for 10^500 different universes. That should cover every possibility. Richard On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Stephen P. King <[email protected]> wrote: On 8/20/2012 1:40 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Hi Stephan, I do not think that string theory requires a fixed background.? Otherwise string theory could not be a prospective ToE. Richard Hi Richard, ?? I had the very same reaction, but research it for yourself. Look at the literature, the trick is the use of fiber bundles which require a base space. They get away with it because they are using the entire space-time manifold (like the frozen ice block idea) as the base space, so it appears to be OK. But this leads to the landscape problem because they have to consider the theory of all possible space-time manifolds. The fundamental problem that I see with the entire exercise is the assumption of primitive matter (here in the form of primitive space-time manifolds that are fibered with a plenum of orbifolds), the very same problem that Bruno is pointing out. The entire idea that "substance is fundamental" needs to be re-evaluated and seen as just a basis of observation and not something ontologically a priori. On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Stephen P. King <[email protected]> wrote: On 8/20/2012 11:36 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Wiki:? Mereology has been axiomatized in various ways as applications of?predicate logic?o?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?ordersits universe, meaning that everything is a part of itself (reflexivity), that a part of a part of a whole is itself a part of that whole (transitivity), 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. ?iki: and that two distinct entities cannot each be a part of the other (antisymmetry). 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. Hi Richard, ? I agree with all with a small exception:? I have a big problem with the superstring theory's use of a fixed background spacetime into which it embeds the compactified manifolds. It violates general covariance in doing this! -- 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. 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 [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
