Re: AW: fractal loops (was: keeping loops interesting)

[Brian Good <bsgood@adelphia.net>]

Krispen Hartung wrote:

> I like this. Now this is starting to seem like the fractal examples I am 
> accustomed to reading about or seeing.

<snip>

> In short, each part reflects some nature of the whole, as in the example 
> above with those chords, as in the phenomenon of holographic images 
> (though only in similarity, not exactness, to appease Rainer and 
> Andy)....the whole is the big monad, or "Modad" as I like to call it. :)

Well, most of the naturally-occurring fractal structures I know about, 
e.g. soot particles, aerogels, etc., are only statistically fractal; 
they don't contain scaled-down exact duplicates of their larger structure.

> Here is another really interesting article on Leibniz' monads and their 
> fractal properties...fascinating. Now I want to go back and read his 
> Monadology again.

Monadology...what a great name for a bebop tune.

> Another analogy to fractal theory, which actuallyl came before fractal 
> theory is the Rationalist theory of knowledge (Leibniz was a Rationalist 
> by the way, so this makes sense), such as from Decartes and Spinoza.  
> One might describe Descartes system of knowledge by the "pocket paradox" 
> analogy, wherebye putting my hand in my own pocket, I can tell what is 
> in the contents of someone else's pocket, direct knowledge with no 
> empirical data. Likewise, according to Rationalists, you can actually 
> reveal the secrets of the universe (truths) via the mind alone...again, 
> that concept of the whole being contained in each part in some fashion. 
> The cosmos inside the mind, such that we can metaphorically "view" its 
> structure and deduce truths.
> 
> Kris

I wonder if you could make a broad argument that this (the hand in the 
pocket trick) in some way presaged quantum entanglement?  Nah, too much 
of a stretch.

Anyway, I think you've just tripled my knowledge of philosophy.  Thanks. 
:-)


Brian