On 8/23/2012 8:07 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote:

Stephan,## Advertising

Thanks for the compliment.I finally got someone with smarts to read it other than Chalmers andS_T Yau.

Dear Richard,

`You are most welcome. I have learned to value the ideas of other`

`people, simply because one can never know what one has missed in`

`thinking about something. ;-)`

Time inflates along with 3 dimensions in the big bang. Leaving 6 dimensions behind to compactify or curl up into tiny balls 1000 planck lengths across each with 500 holes.So each 6-d ball is a fixed structure and 10^90/cc of them fill theuniverse.Hardly a single structure.

`But isn't the entire 10d structure a "single" object". It could`

`embedded into a 11+ dimensional space and moved and rotated about, no?`

Well I really cannot say how time works. Don't know if it is linear,ornonlinear,if it inflates or deflates. Most of string theory appears to threattime as part of a 4-D background spacetime. The paper has little to dowith time. Perhaps it is required for Pratt theory?

`I have thought about time a lot. It is the focus of my research,`

`but I have had to deal with many related issues (such as the mind-body`

`problem) to find a solution.`

`Pratt's theory gives us a way to think about time as a sequential`

`ordering of events (consistent with Leibniz's ideas). Pratt's`

`"residuation" process can even be thought of as a generator of temporal`

`sequences (for each and every observer). I have found a way to model`

`residuation using the idea of bisimulation which is an equivalence`

`relation between computations and some Category theory. Time is thus`

`understood as a local and first person process that can, via`

`concurrency, become objective (3p via consensus of all bisimulating`

`monads) and thus leading to the appearance of a dimension (since the`

`sequencings allow for mapping to the positive Real Line in the continuum`

`limit). One thing must be understood: to properly understand Pratt's`

`theory we have to adopt a Heraclitian paradigm`

`<http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/perspectives_on_science/v009/9.4pitt02.html>`

`where becoming (as opposed to Being) is fundamental.`

`The reasoning about time that I used was mostly developed by Prof.`

`Hitoshi Kitada and discussed in his many papers:`

`http://www.metasciences.ac/Articles/works.html`

RichardOn Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Stephen P. King<stephe...@charter.net <mailto:stephe...@charter.net>> wrote:Dear Richard, Your paper <http://vixra.org/pdf/1101.0044v1.pdf> is very interesting. It reminds me a lot of Stephen Wolfram's cellular automaton theory. I only have one big problem with it. The 10d manifold would be a single fixed structure that, while conceivably capable of running the computations and/or implementing the Peano arithmetic, has a problem with the role of time in it. You might have a solution to this problem that I see that I did not deduce as I read your paper. How do you define time for your model?

-- 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.