On 8/21/2012 8:07 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
> According to string theory themonads do not "only see the external
> world through the eyes of the supreme monad
> (or CPU)". Rather in string theory each individual, discrete, and
> distinct monad sees the entire universe instantly but without complete
> resolution. However integration of information allows for improved
This is the same thing that Roger and I are claiming.
> In string theory there is no supreme monad. Rather any such thing must
> be an intergrated or collective effect of many monads. Leibniz was not
> entirely correct. But he got the most important characteristic, that
> monads are so tiny as to be invisible. And that monads control the
> universe via the laws and constants of nature.
The idea of the supreme is a figure of speech... We can approximate the
supreme with limits...
> Also there is no evidence in string theory that monads come in 3
> types. But the fact that string theory predicts the 3 generations of
> particles in the Standard Model, suggests that it's possible that
> monads come in 3 varieties. But those varieties would have had to be
> available in the primordial, uninflated set of 10 or more dimensions
Please read more detail on string theory, I hate to see you continue in
such a mistake. :_( String theory is materialist nonsense.
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net
> <mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>> wrote:
> Hi Stephen P. King
> To Idealists, the "real" is the idea or concept of a thing,
> The thing as it it appears to us is a phenomenon.
> This inversion of common sense was made by Leibniz
> in order to get rid of the mind-body problem. There's
> no problem really if both are just concepts. They don't
> actually interact, but they can be conceived as interacting.
> There is a tricky point, and is I think a principal reason why L can
> be so confusing---- and critics have observed that even Leibniz can
> sometimes confuse the real with the phenomenal.
> 1) First of all, Idealists such as Leibniz. Berkeley and Kant
> IDEAS to be real, not the material or other phenomena they describe.
> For these guys, the descriptions are real, not the things or
> phenomena they describe,
> which admittedly are transitory.
> Which is NOT to say that to Leibniz, the world out there is a
> No, it is just like it looks and he calls the world we see,
> although phenomenal, "well-founded phenomena".
> You can still stub your toe and feel pain, billiard balls will all
> collide as
> usual, etc. To all purposes, everything will seem normal.
> 2) The monads can only see the external world through the eyes of
> the supreme monad
> (or CPU). This is not direct sight, for one thing monads afre not
> spaced in space or time
> (perhaps heaven is like this ?). They don't really see the outside
> they only see an infinite number of of mirrors, those being
> reflections of the
> monad in question from the [points of view of the other monads.
> in the mirrors or "perceptions" of
> Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net <mailto:rclo...@verizon.net>
> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so
> everything could function."
"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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at