An entity seems to be what Leibniz called a substance or monad. Definition of ENTITY 1 a : being, existence; especially : independent, separate, or self-contained existence b : the existence of a thing as contrasted with its attributes 2 : something that has separate and distinct existence and objective or conceptual reality 3 : an organization (as a business or governmental unit) that has an identity separate from those of its members
----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-31, 17:38:28 Subject: Re: About the Infinite Repetition of Histories in Space On 1/31/2013 4:46 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: What's an entity? Any system whose canonical description can be associated with some kind of fixed point theorem. On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net> wrote: IMHO more than one universe per entity is unjustified. On 1/31/2013 8:09 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Telmo Menezes IMHO more than one universe is unjustified. ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Telmo Menezes Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-30, 12:10:08 Subject: Re: About the Infinite Repetition of Histories in Space Hi Roger, I find it harder to believe in finite universes. Why the precise number, whatever it is? On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote: Hi Stephen P. King It's easier to believe in salvation through faith or UFOs than infinite universes. ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Stephen P. King Receiver: everything-list Time: 2013-01-28, 09:20:33 Subject: About the Infinite Repetition of Histories in Space Hi, ? I think this paper might be fodder for a nice discussion! http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.5295 About the Infinite Repetition of Histories in Space Francisco Jos Soler Gil, Manuel Alfonseca (Submitted on 22 Jan 2013 (v1), last revised 23 Jan 2013 (this version, v2)) This paper analyzes two different proposals, one by Ellis and Brundrit, based on classical relativistic cosmology, the other by Garriga and Vilenkin, based on the DH interpretation of quantum mechanics, both of which conclude that, in an infinite universe, planets and living beings must be repeated an infinite number of times. We point to some possible shortcomings in the arguments of these authors. We conclude that the idea of an infinite repetition of histories in space cannot be considered strictly speaking a consequence of current physics and cosmology. Such ideas should be seen rather as examples of {\guillemotleft}ironic science{\guillemotright} in the terminology of John Horgan. -- Onward! Stephen -- 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?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.