Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.
Hi Richard Ruquist No, the properties are outside of spacetime, the objects of the properties are within spacetime. You still don't get it. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/7/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-06, 09:50:18 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Entities are either in spacetime (physical), or outside of spacetime (nonphysical). Merely an assumption Roger because you cannot understand how entities in spacetime can have properties that are effectively outside of spacetime. Sobeit. Richard Quanta are outside of spacetime (as nonphysical probability fields) until detected or they hit a barrier, which puts them inside of spacetime (they become physical such as a photon or electron), since in that case one can assign a location to them at a specific time. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/6/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 13:00:30 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Mapping refers to the perception of the monads. The string theory monads exist in space but have properties that effectively put them outside of spacetime. They are not simply ideas if string theory is correct. On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand. You're confusing the map (the monads, which you can think of as ideas or information) with the territory (physical space). It is the corporeal bodies of substances that the monads refer to, not the monads themselves, are distributed in space, but the monads are not. They are just ideas, which as always are outside of spacetime. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 09:34:15 Subject: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger does not understand my argument that the monads of string theory are effectively inextended despite they being uniformly distributed throughout the universe at a density of 10^90/cc because each monad maps the entire universe instantly and they collectively form a BEC. In addition they collectively possess Peano cosmic consciousness so that there is no need for a supreme monad. Richard On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand inextended variables. Since 1p is inextended (it involves consciousness), 1p has no size, so it could include an infinite number of universes. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 08:54:30 Subject: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. RC, So the entire universe can be in 1p at all times. RR On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Yes, God is the supreme observer. See Leibniz. The supreme monad sees all clearly. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 05:59:05 Subject: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger, Isn't your god an observer? Richard On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-01, 18:00:16 Subject: Re: Against Mechanism On 12/1/2012 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: Again there is nothing special about an observer in this, the same thing would happen if nobody looked at the film, or even if you used a brick wall instead of film, because the important thing is not that the photon makes a record (whatever that is) but simply that it is destroyed. But you can do the experiment with electrons too, and the electrons are not destroyed. Good point. If electrons are used in the two-split experiment a brick wall probably wouldn't do, you'd need a metal wall. Brick is a pretty good insulator so you'd end up with 2 small negatively charged spots on the wall in slightly different places
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.
Hi Richard Ruquist Entities are either in spacetime (physical), or outside of spacetime (nonphysical). Quanta are outside of spacetime (as nonphysical probability fields) until detected or they hit a barrier, which puts them inside of spacetime (they become physical such as a photon or electron), since in that case one can assign a location to them at a specific time. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/6/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 13:00:30 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Mapping refers to the perception of the monads. The string theory monads exist in space but have properties that effectively put them outside of spacetime. They are not simply ideas if string theory is correct. On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand. You're confusing the map (the monads, which you can think of as ideas or information) with the territory (physical space). It is the corporeal bodies of substances that the monads refer to, not the monads themselves, are distributed in space, but the monads are not. They are just ideas, which as always are outside of spacetime. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 09:34:15 Subject: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger does not understand my argument that the monads of string theory are effectively inextended despite they being uniformly distributed throughout the universe at a density of 10^90/cc because each monad maps the entire universe instantly and they collectively form a BEC. In addition they collectively possess Peano cosmic consciousness so that there is no need for a supreme monad. Richard On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand inextended variables. Since 1p is inextended (it involves consciousness), 1p has no size, so it could include an infinite number of universes. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 08:54:30 Subject: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. RC, So the entire universe can be in 1p at all times. RR On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Yes, God is the supreme observer. See Leibniz. The supreme monad sees all clearly. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 05:59:05 Subject: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger, Isn't your god an observer? Richard On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-01, 18:00:16 Subject: Re: Against Mechanism On 12/1/2012 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: Again there is nothing special about an observer in this, the same thing would happen if nobody looked at the film, or even if you used a brick wall instead of film, because the important thing is not that the photon makes a record (whatever that is) but simply that it is destroyed. But you can do the experiment with electrons too, and the electrons are not destroyed. Good point. If electrons are used in the two-split experiment a brick wall probably wouldn't do, you'd need a metal wall. Brick is a pretty good insulator so you'd end up with 2 small negatively charged spots on the wall in slightly different places; How would you get two charged spots? Would each have charge -e/2? The experiment was originally done with photographic film, so that each electron ionized a silver halide atom resulting in a silver spot on the film. Now it's usually down is some kind of detector that amplifies the effect of each electron. Neither one has anything to do with destroying the electron. the walls would not be the same and so the 2 universes would not be the same and so they would not merge. However if it was a metal wall the electrons would just join the general sea of free electrons in the metal and there is no way even in theory to tell one electron from another. So the walls would have the same
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Entities are either in spacetime (physical), or outside of spacetime (nonphysical). Merely an assumption Roger because you cannot understand how entities in spacetime can have properties that are effectively outside of spacetime. Sobeit. Richard Quanta are outside of spacetime (as nonphysical probability fields) until detected or they hit a barrier, which puts them inside of spacetime (they become physical such as a photon or electron), since in that case one can assign a location to them at a specific time. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/6/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 13:00:30 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Mapping refers to the perception of the monads. The string theory monads exist in space but have properties that effectively put them outside of spacetime. They are not simply ideas if string theory is correct. On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand. You're confusing the map (the monads, which you can think of as ideas or information) with the territory (physical space). It is the corporeal bodies of substances that the monads refer to, not the monads themselves, are distributed in space, but the monads are not. They are just ideas, which as always are outside of spacetime. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 09:34:15 Subject: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger does not understand my argument that the monads of string theory are effectively inextended despite they being uniformly distributed throughout the universe at a density of 10^90/cc because each monad maps the entire universe instantly and they collectively form a BEC. In addition they collectively possess Peano cosmic consciousness so that there is no need for a supreme monad. Richard On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand inextended variables. Since 1p is inextended (it involves consciousness), 1p has no size, so it could include an infinite number of universes. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 08:54:30 Subject: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. RC, So the entire universe can be in 1p at all times. RR On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Yes, God is the supreme observer. See Leibniz. The supreme monad sees all clearly. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 05:59:05 Subject: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger, Isn't your god an observer? Richard On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-01, 18:00:16 Subject: Re: Against Mechanism On 12/1/2012 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: Again there is nothing special about an observer in this, the same thing would happen if nobody looked at the film, or even if you used a brick wall instead of film, because the important thing is not that the photon makes a record (whatever that is) but simply that it is destroyed. But you can do the experiment with electrons too, and the electrons are not destroyed. Good point. If electrons are used in the two-split experiment a brick wall probably wouldn't do, you'd need a metal wall. Brick is a pretty good insulator so you'd end up with 2 small negatively charged spots on the wall in slightly different places; How would you get two charged spots? Would each have charge -e/2? The experiment was originally done with photographic film, so that each electron ionized a silver halide atom resulting in a silver spot on the film. Now it's usually down is some kind of detector that amplifies the effect of each electron. Neither one has anything to do with destroying the electron. the walls would not be the same and so the 2 universes would
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.
On Thursday, December 6, 2012 8:08:44 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Entities are either in spacetime (physical), or outside of spacetime (nonphysical). My understanding is that physical refers to entities in public space. For an entity to persist through time requires some kind of private memory and experience, which I would not call nonphysical but rather sensory. Quanta are outside of spacetime (as nonphysical probability fields) until detected or they hit a barrier, which puts them inside of spacetime (they become physical such as a photon or electron), since in that case one can assign a location to them at a specific time. If you have sensory physics, you don't need literal photons or electrons as they are the misinterpreted quantitative representations of sensory events through time which give rise to public space. Spacetime is nothing more than scopes which limit sensory perception and motor participation. Spacetime is not the ground of being, rather it is the gaps within which the Absolute monad subdivides into countless interactive local monads. Craig [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net] javascript: 12/6/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - *From:* Richard Ruquist javascript: *Receiver:* everything-list javascript: *Time:* 2012-12-05, 13:00:30 *Subject:* Re: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Mapping refers to the perception of the monads. The string theory monads exist in space but have properties that effectively put them outside of spacetime. They are not simply ideas if string theory is correct. On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.netjavascript: wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand. You're confusing the map (the monads, which you can think of as ideas or information) with the territory (physical space). It is the corporeal bodies of substances that the monads refer to, not the monads themselves, are distributed in space, but the monads are not. They are just ideas, which as always are outside of spacetime. [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net javascript:] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-05, 09:34:15 Subject: Re: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger does not understand my argument that the monads of string theory are effectively inextended despite they being uniformly distributed throughout the universe at a density of 10^90/cc because each monad maps the entire universe instantly and they collectively form a BEC. In addition they collectively possess Peano cosmic consciousness so that there is no need for a supreme monad. Richard On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.netjavascript: wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist You still don't understand inextended variables. Since 1p is inextended (it involves consciousness), 1p has no size, so it could include an infinite number of universes. [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net javascript:] 12/5/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 08:54:30 Subject: Re: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. RC, So the entire universe can be in 1p at all times. RR On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.netjavascript: wrote: Hi Richard Ruquist Yes, God is the supreme observer. See Leibniz. The supreme monad sees all clearly. [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net javascript:] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ruquist Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-03, 05:59:05 Subject: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. Roger, Isn't your god an observer? Richard On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Roger Clough rcl...@verizon.netjavascript: wrote: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer. [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net javascript:] 12/3/2012 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-01, 18:00:16 Subject: Re: Against Mechanism On 12/1/2012 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote: Again there is nothing special about an observer in this, the same thing would happen if nobody looked at the film, or even if you used a brick wall instead of film, because the important thing is not that the photon makes a record (whatever that is) but simply that it is destroyed. But you can do
