The waveform is subjective as it represents a particular quantum state. In COMP terms it is 3p. But comp people may not think of it as subjective since every quantum state is realized and therefore all quanta are objective.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Roger Clough <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Stephen P. King > > hmmm. > > Quanta and monads are singular entities. > > QM has the dualism particle/wave > > Monadology has extended/inextended. > > These might be construed as similar. > > But QM doesn't to my knowledge have the dualism objective/subjective > unless the waveform is subjective. > > > Roger Clough, [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 <[email protected]> > *Receiver:* everything-list <[email protected]> > *Time:* 2012-08-23, 13:03:04 > *Subject:* Re: What are monads ? A difficulty > > Hi Roger, > > I like the idea that pure QM systems are the best example of a monad. > > On 8/23/2012 11:14 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > > Hi Stephen P. King > Right. "The world is filled with monads"was just a way of saying things, > just a rhetorical phrase. > All physical things in the world are substances rather than monads. > If you can measure it, it's not a monad. If you can think of it, in > some cases (see below) it is a monad. > Monads are simply mental points in ideal space, which have a potential > driving force, such as the driving force of life (called entelechy). > A desire to realize its own potential. So monads can be said to be alive. > Monads have to be uniform substances that one could use as the > subject of a sentence. As as thought of, as intended, with no parts. > Personally I > would correct that to say "no parts at the level of image magnification > intended." > This is one of the main difficulties in understanding Leibniz. If you think > of Socrates as a whole, not separately of organs, etc., that Socrates > would be a monad. A monad has to be, as they say, "the whole > enchilada". > I would say thus that I am a monad, as are you. > Monads and snd the substances they refer to are infinite in variety. > Space and time are excluded from this as space and time separately are > not in spacetime. > Roger Clough, [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 <[email protected]> > *Receiver:* everything-list <[email protected]> > *Time:* 2012-08-23, 08:28:33 > *Subject:* Re: Leibniz's theodicy: a nonlocal and hopefully best mereology > > Hi Roger, > > I agree in spirit with you but cringe at the use of the word "filled". Do > you have any ideas as to the mereological relation between monads? > > On 8/23/2012 8:08 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > > Hi Richard, > There are an infinite number of different monads, since > the world is filled with them and each is a > different perspective on the whole of the rest. > Not only that, but they keep changing, as > all life does. > Roger Clough, [email protected] > 8/23/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so > everything could function." > > > > -- > 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.
