Re: Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but arenotexactly the same
Nonesense. On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Richard Ruquist > > Strings in string theory only exist on paper or a blackboard as a bunch of > complicated equations for > vibrations in hypothetical strings (loops I think) that coincidentally and > miraculously model the > actual behavior of various particles. It is a wonder in itself, but string > theory is just that--theory. > Not actual strings. Period. > > What more can I say ? > > I'm not going to answer any more questions along these lines. > > > > 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, 09:07:52 > *Subject:* Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related > but arenotexactly 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 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 >> *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 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 >>> *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 wrote: >>> Hi Stephen P. Kin
Re: Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but arenotexactly the same
Hi Richard Ruquist Strings in string theory only exist on paper or a blackboard as a bunch of complicated equations for vibrations in hypothetical strings (loops I think) that coincidentally and miraculously model the actual behavior of various particles. It is a wonder in itself, but string theory is just that--theory. Not actual strings. Period. What more can I say ? I'm not going to answer any more questions along these lines. 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, 09:07:52 Subject: Re: Re: A Correction: Strings and monads are somehow related but arenotexactly 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 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 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 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 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
