Hi Roger, Indeed! This corresponds to non-distributive logical lattices.But we still need more details. The best attempt that i have seen on deriving extension was Roger Penrose' spin network idea.
On 8/23/2012 8:04 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Stephen P. King > Some entities (like my mouse) are extended in space, others (like what > I am thinking) are not. > It isn't either/or, it''s both/and. > Roger Clough, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > 8/23/2012 > 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 <mailto:[email protected]> > *Receiver:* everything-list <mailto:[email protected]> > *Time:* 2012-08-22, 11:23:08 > *Subject:* Re: NewsFlash: Monadic weather today will be cloudy > with achanceofthunderstorms > > Dear Roger, > > A lot of people have a very hard time comprehending abstract > ideas, they are stuck thinking of them as physical things. A small > minority of people are stuck thinking of concepts as purely > mental. It is necessary to consider both of these points of view > and be able to understand the difference between them. The best > analogy of the relation between them is the inside and outside > views of a volume filled with hollow spheres.Waht happens if the > spheres are actually Klein Bottles? > > On 8/22/2012 9:17 AM, Roger Clough wrote: >> Hi Richard Ruquist >> I'm getting tired of trying to explain this to you. You have to >> do more thinking. >> Monads have no extension. And they have no location nor time. So >> they are merely >> theoretical, extensionless, outside of spacetime. You have to >> have extension to >> physically exist. >> Roger Clough, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> 8/22/2012 >> 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 <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Receiver:* everything-list >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Time:* 2012-08-22, 09:09:31 >> *Subject:* Re: Re: NewsFlash: Monadic weather today will be >> cloudy with a chanceofthunderstorms >> >> Roger, >> >> Space is not empty. It is full of monads at 10^90/cc. >> These are the building blocks of space in >> integration-information theory. >> Richard >> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Roger Clough >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi Richard Ruquist >> >> You need to study the monadology. And the history of >> modern physics. >> >> Space does not physically exist for L (as for us) because >> it is empty, as the Milligan-whatshisname >> experiment proved a century ago. The notion of an ether >> is a fantasy. It doesn't exist. >> Photons just go from A to B through a quantum or >> mathematical wavefield, not an actual one. >> >> >> Roger Clough, [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> 8/22/2012 >> 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 <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Receiver:* everything-list >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Time:* 2012-08-22, 07:06:07 >> *Subject:* Re: NewsFlash: Monadic weather today will >> be cloudy with a chance ofthunderstorms >> >> Roger, " monads are by definition nonlocal " does not >> mean that " space does not exist". Your logic is faulty. >> Richard >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Roger Clough >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi benjayk >> In monadic theory,�since space does not exist, >> monads are by definition nonlocal, thus all minds >> in a sense are one >> and can commune with one another as well as with >> God (the mind behind the supreme monad). >> The clarity of intercommunication will of course >> depend, of course, on the sensitivity of the >> monads, their intelligence, >> and how "near" (resonant) their partners are, as >> well as other factors�such as whether or not its >> a clear�monadic weather day. >> Roger Clough, [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> 8/22/2012 >> Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have >> to invent him so everything could function." >> >> ----- Receiving the following content ----- >> *From:* benjayk >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Receiver:* everything-list >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> *Time:* 2012-08-21, 17:24:01 >> *Subject:* Re: Simple proof that our >> intelligence transcends that of computers >> >> meekerdb wrote: >> > >> > "This sentence cannot be confirmed to be >> true by a human being." >> > >> > The Computer >> > >> >> He might be right in saying that (See my >> response to Saibal). >> But it can't confirm it as well (how could >> it, since we as humans can't >> confirm it and what he knows about us derives >> from what we program into >> it?). So still, it is less capable than a human. >> -- >> V >> > -- 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.
