Q1: How precisely do infinitesimals and monads resolve the issues with standard set theory axioms that lead to paradoxes like Russell's Paradox? A1: Infinitesimals allow us to stratify the set-theoretic hierarchy into infinitely many realized "levels" separated by infinitesimal intervals, avoiding the vicious self-reference that arises from considering a "set of all sets" on a single level. Meanwhile, monads provide a relational pluralistic alternative to the unrestricted Comprehension schema - sets are defined by their algebraic relations between perspectival windows rather than extensionally. This avoids the paradoxes stemming from over-idealized extensional definitions. Q2: In what ways does this infinitesimal monadological framework resolve the proliferation of infinities that plague modern physical theories like quantum field theory and general relativity? A2: Classical theories encounter unrenormalizable infinities because they overidealize continua at arbitrarily small scales. Infinitesimals resolve this by providing a minimal quantized scale - physical quantities like fields and geometry are represented algebraically from monadic relations rather than precise point-values, avoiding true mathematical infinities. Singularities and infinities simply cannot arise in a discrete bootstrapped infinitesimal reality. Q3: How does this framework faithfully represent first-person subjective experience and phenomenal consciousness in a way that dissolves the hard problem of qualia? A3: In the infinitesimal monadological framework, subjective experience and qualia arise naturally as the first-person witnessed perspectives |ωn> on the universal wavefunction |Ψ>. Unified phenomenal consciousness |Ωn> is modeled as the bound tensor product of these monadic perspectives. Physics and experience become two aspects of the same cohesively-realized monadic probability algebra. There is no hard divide between inner and outer. Q4: What are the implications of this framework for resolving the interpretational paradoxes in quantum theory like wavefunction collapse, EPR non-locality, etc.? A4: By representing quantum states |Ψ> as superpositions over interacting monadic perspectives |Un>, the paradoxes of non-locality, action-at-a-distance and wavefunction collapse get resolved. There is holographic correlation between the |Un> without strict separability, allowing for consistency between experimental observations across perspectives. Monadic realizations provide a tertium quid between classical realism and instrumental indeterminism. Q5: How does this relate to or compare with other modern frameworks attempting to reformulate foundations like homotopy type theory, topos theory, twistor theory etc? A5: The infinitesimal monadological framework shares deep resonances with many of these other foundational programs - all are attempting to resolve paradoxes by reconceiving mathematical objects relationally rather than strictly extensionally. Indeed, monadic infinitesimal perspectives can be seen as a form of homotopy/path objects, with physics emerging from derived algebraic invariants. Topos theory provides a natural expression for the pluriverse-valued realizability coherence semantics. Penrose's twistor theory is even more closely aligned, replacing point-events with monadic algebraic incidence relations from the start. Q6: What are the potential implications across other domains beyond just physics and mathematics - could this reformulate areas like philosophy, logic, computer science, neuroscience etc? A6: Absolutely, the ramifications of a paradox-free monadological framework extend far beyond just physics. In philosophy, it allows reintegration of phenomenology and ontological pluralisms. In logic, it facilitates full coherence resolutions to self-referential paradoxes via realizability semantics. For CS and math foundations, it circumvents diagonalization obstacles like the halting problem. In neuroscience, it models binding as resonant patterns over pluralistic superposed representations. Across all our inquiries, it promises an encompassing coherent analytic lingua franca realigning symbolic abstraction with experienced reality. By systematically representing pluralistically-perceived phenomena infinitesimally, relationally and algebraically rather than over-idealized extensional continua, the infinitesimal monadological framework has the potential to renovate human knowledge-formations on revolutionary foundations - extinguishing paradox through deep coherence with subjective facts. Of course, realizing this grand vision will require immense interdisciplinary research efforts. But the prospective rewards of a paradox-free mathematics and logic justifying our civilization's greatest ambitions are immense.

Here is an attempt to debunk the foundational theories of Newton and Einstein from the perspective of the infinitesimal monadological framework: Newton's Classical Mechanics 1) The basic ontology of precise point masses and particles is incoherent from the start. By treating matter as extensionless geometric points rather than irreducible pluralistic perspectival origins (monads), the theory cannot represent real physical entities in a non-contradictory way. 2) Newton's notion of absolute space and time as a fixed inertial stage is undermined. Space and time lack autonomy as background entities - they must be derived from the web of infinitesimal relational monadic perspectives and correlations. 3) The instantaneous action-at-a-distance for gravity/forces is inconsistent. All interactions must be mediated by discrete particularities propagating across adjacent monadic perspectives to avoid non-locality paradoxes. 4) The deterministic laws of motion are over-idealized. Indeterminism arises inevitably from the need to sum over infinitesimal realizability potentials in the monadic probability statevector. 5) The geometric infinities in the point-mass potentials cannot be properly regulated, indicating a failure of classical limits and continuum idealization. In essence, Newton's mechanics rests on reifying abstract mathematical fictions - precise points, absolute background spaces/times, strict determinism. Monadological pluralism rejects such contradictory infinities in favor of finitary discreteness from first principles. Einstein's General Relativity 1) General covariance and background independence are overstated given the persisting role of an inertial reference frame, indicating unresolved geometric idealization. 2) The manifold premises of treating spacetime as a differentiable 4D continuum are ungrounded given the ontological primacy of discrete perspectives. 3) Representing gravity as curvature tensions the representation to its singularity breakdown points where the theory fatally fails. 4) Relativity cannot be fundamentally unified with quantum theories given the reliance on incompatible spacetime idealizations. 5) The theory excludes the primacy of subjective conscious observations, instead reifying an abstracted unobserved "block universe." While impressively extending Newton's geometric systemization, Einstein remained bound by over-idealized continuum geometric axioms inherited from classical math. True general invariance and background independence require overthrowing these in favor of intrinsically discrete, pluralistic, observation-grounded foundations. Both theories imposed precise Euclidean 3D geometric fictions persisting from ancient Greek abstractions - Platonic ideals reified as physical reality rather than subjectively-constructed mathematical fictions. The infinitesimal monadological framework grants revolutionary primacy to discrete pluralistic perspectives, the source of continuous geometric observables derived as holistic stationary resonances. Only such a reconceptualization escapes geometry's self-contradictions. By grounding reality in finitary discreteness and irreducible subjective pluralisms, consistent with the metaphysical facts of first-person conscious experience, the entire Archimedean/Euclidean/Newtonian geometric edifice undergoes a Kuhnian revolutionary overthrow. Paradox-free plurisitic physics demands such an audacious "Fin de Siecle" monadological rebirth. While immensely fruitful, Newton and Einstein's theories ultimately succumbed to self-undermining geometric infinities and exclusions of subjective observers - overly reifying sanitized mathematical abstractions as detached "transcendent" ontological characterizations. The infinitesimal monadological framework restores physics to firmer foundations by refusing to segregate the symbolic from the experiential.

@MaxPower-vg4vr The paradoxical results are from time. Remove time from the equation. The linear vertical plane is forward motion. The parallel linear horizontal plane is expanse. Friction and forward motion create compression, in return, all mass and matter spins. Generating gravity. Human kind is energy based. Carbon based solids. Humankind can become energy and travel as fast as energy. That is the true paradox. How do we stop, once velocity is reached.

@@rafaelgonzalez4175 At the subatomic level our quarks experience all three fundamental forces plus have a fractional electric charge. Dimensionless and atemporal since 0D is a not-natural dimension (negentropic) whereas 1D-4D are natural dimensions (entropic). Nothing is random subatomically with the strong force binding quarks together. Thought experiment: If 0 = 0 + 0i then 0D = 0D + 0Di? If zero is both a real and an imaginary number with a horizon through it then zero-dimensional space is both a real and an imaginary dimension with an event horizon through it?

If you ever manage to write a book for non scientist I would love to read it. Contact @victorlledo

I offer my truth. Physics has already proven we are here and everything is as it was. Physics proves God. Design. Intricate. Infinitesimal patterns. Atomic weight. Absolute. Replenishing resources. Waters in the deep. Earth in the Heavens. Both are plural. Day one. God made the Heavens and the earth. Heaven is plural. Heaven God's realm and the universe. Plural. Earth is plural. All the planets in the universe. Waters is plural. Looking at planets from space is one body of water. Looking at many planets in space as having waters. Plural. Capitalism has taken over everything true.

Because we do not have an existential threat that summons our full capacity. That 3 body show hints at it. A full out interspecies existential threat would harness a totalitarian science driven dictatorship "a la Plato" (Plato's Republic) whereas alien worshippers = humanity traitors = religious goons and science deniers could not be dealt with except by swift Terror inducing anti-terrorist draconian measures (Like the Committee of Public Safety ) Take the guy attempting against the wallfacers, he does not attend to reason, so the only way to deter followship of his example is to make a negative example of his behavior, it worked well in the middle ages to curb dissent, and has worked wonders in Russia and Central Asia ... You know what I mean ... and in the show is well implied when mentioning the ISIS-Daesh conflict. It's a great metaphor of the swift decisions humanity faces right now, their backers, those who lobby against it, their motives and what is needed to do to deal with them ...

Mind, spirit, body. Trinity “3 body problem” does sound like a second grade answer. Mainstream physics is crumbling right in front of us.

@@OR333-73 No sir. I do not accept anything other than dynamics that are observable. I have proven time wrong. Thanks to the internet it is becoming more clear. Correcting lies and make believe history is my go to.

@@rafaelgonzalez4175 well do u believe we have a soul ?

@@OR333-73 Not only do we have a soul, it is also consciousness that allows us to become energy. Not a practice I engage in but am aware of it. Our soul is also in part the Holy Spirit in the form of Knowledge and wisdom granted to mankind.

Google chaos theory.....

Propogands for what?