Hi Pantheon

Perhaps somebody can correct me on this. More details below.

I'm no physical genius, I just applied some common sense
by noting that, under the right conditions (limited bandwidth),
you can express a one-dimensional (1d) signal in time from a 
0 dimensional set of numbers. 

Continuing in this way, one can go from 0d-->1d---->2d---->3d
Since one can regard the orginal set of numbers (in 0d) as
mental, one ends up creating a 3d object out of just numbers
(mental ideas.)

Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000]
See my Leibniz site at

----- Receiving the following content -----  
From:  Roger Clough  
Time: 2013-06-28, 12:03:09 
Subject: *******The holographic principle is a rational justification for 

>*****The Holographic Principle---A rational justification for idealism*****. 
>The holographic principle seems to be an epplication similar to discretization 
>continuous signals. In that case, there is no loss in information in 
>converting a continuous time signal into an indexed set of point values, as  
>long as the sampling rate is twice the highest frequency in a continuous 
>This might be a physical vbasis for Leibniz's discrete samplings of 
>images giving the "whole" picture.  
>Continuing that line of thought, and under the proper cicumstances, 
>(from 3 to 2 dimensions) >> infomation in a volume = information in the 
>volume's surface.  
>(from 2 to 1 dimensions) >>  infomation in a surface= information in the 
>moving line describing the surface  
> ( from  1 to 0 dimensions) >> 
>>>  infomation in the smoving line = information in an indexed set of signal 
>>> values 
>Monadization of a 3d physical violume would then be successively  
>3d to 0d mental point  
>----- Have received the following content -----   
>Sender:  Roger Clough   
>Receiver:  4dworldx   
>Time: 2013-06-28, 11:04:56  
>Subject: Smolin, the Holographic Principle and Modern Physics  
>>It appears that Smolin is using the Holographic principle HP (below)  
>>to find an alternate representation for Einstein's equations.  
>>This also pops up in theories of the black hole, which has a vortex-shaped 
>>Also (not shown below) the relationship between a membrane and some related  
>>volume. The flat geometry of the universe may be another example.  
>>This being so, it would seem that the contents of a brain  
>>should be given in the  brain's surface, just as the  
>>cylindrical surface of a neuron should contain the  "thought" within.  
>>The Holographic Principle (that a surface can completely define the volume 
>>and Modern Physics    
>>In 1993 the famous Dutch theoretical physicist G. 't Hooft put forward a bold 
>>proposal which is   
>>reminiscent of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. This proposal, which is known as 
>>the Holographic Principle,   
>>consists of two basic assertions:    
>>Assertion 1 The first assertion of the Holographic Principle is that all of 
>>the information contained in   
>>some region of space can be represented as a `Hologram' - a theory which 
>>`lives' on the boundary of that region.   
>>For example, if the region of space in question is the DAMTP Tearoom, then 
>>the holographic principle asserts   
>>that all of the physics which takes place in the DAMTP Tearoom can be 
>>represented by a theory which is defined on the walls of the Tearoom.    
>>Assertion 2 The second assertion of the Holographic Principle is that the 
>>theory on the   
>>boundary of the region of space in question should contain at most one degree 
>>of freedom per Planck area.    
>>A Planck area is the area enclosed by a little square which has side length 
>>equal to the Planck length, a   
>>basic unit of length which is usually denoted Lp. The Planck length is a 
>>fundamental unit of length, because   
>>it is the parameter with the dimensions of length which can be constructed 
>>out of the basic constants   
>>G (Newton's constant for the strength of gravitational interactions), ?  
>>(Planck's constant from quantum mechanics),   
>>and c (the speed of light). A quick calculation reveals that Lp is very small 
>>To many people, the Holographic Principle seems strange and counterintuitive: 
>>How could all of the physics which takes place in a given room be equivalent 
>>some physics defined on the walls of the room? Could all of the information   
>>contained in your body actually be represented by your `shadow'?    
>>Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000]   
>>See my Leibniz site at   

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to