I would like to reply to that point about monads insofar as how it is comparable to membrane and quanta within the string theory paradigm as I understand it generally.
With the development of math such as finding the square root of minus one useful on Cartesian X-Y graphs so negative numbers can be plotted, and with the development of the graph in three dimensions rather than just two useful for placing coordinates in real space and with the addition of non-visualizable extra-dimensions on such theoretical spaces up to 256 dimensions or more perhaps it is possible to construct 10 dimensional hypothetical structures.
As I understand it, things such as Calabi-Yau space of extra dimensions help with structuring or channeling quanta of energy.
When light quanta was shown by Einstein in his Nobel prize winning of 1905-the photo-electric effect, and with the previous discovery that energy from atoms existed in fixed quanta levels physics progressed toward further discoveries in quantum mechanics all the way up to the strong forces and later quarks. The philosophical nature of the quantum structures is easier to explain with extra-dimensional structures in which energy can exist, pass or emerge in just select locations.
The strong force is a good example with its three quarks that bond stronger as they try to move apart, and there are actually something like 9 quarks in groups of three I seem to remember reading in 'One to Nine'.
Magnetism has positive and negative poles yet it is probably because the field flows in just one direction in one side and out the other. It may be that all energy flows in such a way with the dimensions that it flows through large and small determining how much quantity of energy is permitted, where it can exist and in what way.
Though monads or membranes, strings or such may be the smallest presently known units of energy, it is not at all certain that they or any other mapped observation of quanta of energy are the minimal state. It seems that the smaller the energy unit is, or the closer to the underlying field whatever it is, the stronger is the bond that keeps it together, perhaps because the twist that enables it to loop in upon itself as a structure is the most basic.
Leibniz has spiritual monads or one dimensional membranes as his basic quanta, yet philosophically I wonder about the fundamental paradox of monism and pluralism. I understand that God is a spiritual Being yet He is able to issue a pluralist field through various mysterious ways.
For the benefit of the hardened atheists out there I must stipulate that an undifferentiated monism that allows itself to become something that appears to be pluralist in the form of strings, membranes, quarks and so forth is a paradigm for itself standing even without regard to atheist opinion, if it exists. It is a philosophically interesting conjecture to me at least...
Why does an undifferentiated 'energy' become pluralist in various forms?
Those forms are without real or meaningful time as G.R. and S.R. point out. Time is a phenomenon of energy-mass formations locally without and absolute direction except perhaps in relation to larger macro-structural space-time formations such as the hypothetical Universe and its expansion 13.7 billion years past. Time, as Tillich noted, would be in 'The Eternal Now' for the basic monistic field although the temporal progression of local time varieties of phenomenality arise and flow perhaps comparable to the solar flares while the sun itself goes on for billions of years-yet for the fundamental field that time paradigm is a non sequitur.
No comments:
Post a Comment