Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but are notexactly the same
Hi Richard Ruquist OK. That sounds basically right to me, except i don't understand the r-- 1/r part. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 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 Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-22, 07:12:07 Subject: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but are notexactly the same String theory explains indirect monadic perception as the instantaneous mapping of the entire universe outside the monad to its interior in a r- 1/r mapping, first derived by Brian Green in a two-dimensional approximation. On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King (and Richard) ? That particles (strings) can see the universe the universe is different from monadic (indirect) ?erception because monadic perception does not occur by photons, distances are not involved, and so is instantaneous.? Monadic perception is also somewhat imperfect (near-sighted and somewhat dim) in a practical sense, whereas photons transmit information slower but perfectly. ? This is? difficulty of a type I feared but didn't resolve when I simply claimed that strings are monads. Obviously if the universe is made up entirely of strings and entirely of monads there is likely some corresponce?etween the two, but?t is not simply equivalence. ? ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 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: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-21, 08:11:08 Subject: Re: How Leibniz solved the mind-body problem On 8/21/2012 8:07 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Roger, According to string theory the?onads do not only see the external world through the eyes of the supreme monad (or CPU). Rather?n string theory?ach individual, discrete, and distinct monad sees the entire universe instantly but without complete resolution. However integration of information allows for improved resolution. Hi Richard, ?? 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 Richard ?? 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 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.?hey don't actually interact, but they can be conceived as interacting. ? There is a?ricky point, and is I think? principal reason why L can be so confusing and critics have observed?hat even Leibniz can sometimes confuse the real with the phenomenal. ? 1) First of all, Idealists such as Leibniz. Berkeley and Kant consider 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 hallucination. 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,?illiard 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,?or one thing monads afre not spaced in space or time (perhaps heaven is like this ?). They don't really see the outside world, they only see an infinite number of?f mirrors, those being reflections of the monad in question from the [points of view of the other monads. ? ? ?n the mirrors or perceptions of ? ? ? ? ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 8/21/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. snip -- Onward! Stephen Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.
Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but are notexactly the same
Hi Roger Clough, In Green's 2-D solution the monad is approximated as a circle, which is how say the east-west and the west east dimensions curl up on each otheto allow one east-west dimension to inflate in the big bang. His supersymmetry string solution found that in each direction the outside of the circle was mapped in a r-1/r mapping to its interior so that the center of the circle integrated all information at r=infinity. I expect that someday the 3-D problem will be solved. Richard Ruquist On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist OK. That sounds basically right to me, except i don't understand the r-- 1/r part. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 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 yann...@gmail.com *Receiver:* everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com *Time:* 2012-08-22, 07:12:07 *Subject:* Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but are notexactly the same String theory explains indirect monadic perception as the instantaneous mapping of the entire universe outside the monad to its interior in a r- 1/r mapping, first derived by Brian Green in a two-dimensional approximation. On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stephen P. King (and Richard) � That particles (strings) can see the universe the universe is different from monadic (indirect) 爌erception because monadic perception does not occur by photons, distances are not involved, and so is instantaneous.牋 Monadic perception is also somewhat imperfect (near-sighted and somewhat dim) in a practical sense, whereas photons transmit information slower but perfectly. � This is燼 difficulty of a type I feared but didn't resolve when I simply claimed that strings are monads. Obviously if the universe is made up entirely of strings and entirely of monads there is likely some corresponce燽etween the two, but爄t is not simply equivalence. � � Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 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:* Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net *Receiver:* everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com *Time:* 2012-08-21, 08:11:08 *Subject:* Re: How Leibniz solved the mind-body problem On 8/21/2012 8:07 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Roger, According to string theory the爉onads do not only see the external world through the eyes of the supreme monad (or CPU). Rather爄n string theory爀ach individual, discrete, and distinct monad sees the entire universe instantly but without complete resolution. However integration of information allows for improved resolution. Hi Richard, 牋� 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. 牋� 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 Richard 牋� 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.netwrote: 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.燭hey don't actually interact, but they can be conceived as interacting. � There is a爐ricky point, and is I think燼 principal reason why L can be so confusing and critics have observed爐hat even Leibniz can sometimes confuse the real with the phenomenal. � 1) First of all, Idealists such as Leibniz. Berkeley and Kant consider 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 hallucination. 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
