Twentieth Skype Call (10-20-2020)

As to isonomia like on most difficult issues I think of what DeWitt said and think he was probably on the right track when he said "the mistake of rendering it as 'equilibrium' must be avoided." I think that addresses Susan's "equal number" concern. I personally think we just have too few texts to know whether the comments in Velleius about the way the gods look and talk etc are really representative of Epicurus, or just idle speculation. We today have our views of what the factors Susan lists would to to life out there, and presumably we're closer to being correct than they were, but it's very hard to say:

Also as to this:

Quote from Susan Hill

Does everything that exists exist in infinite numbers, and then also in infinite numbers in a divine form

there are several references in Lucretius to what "can and CANNOT exist' so "limitations" on what is possible seem to go hand in hand at the same time even with the view that the universe is infinite and eternal. So it would be important not to come to the conclusion that infinity and eternality mean that "all things are possible" because Lucretius/Epicurus specifically say otherwise.

Edit: No doubt DeWitt is engaging in speculation of his own, so we always have to keep that in mind. Nobody's speculation is likely to be 100% reliable. I tend to think that DeWitt was more "in tune" with Epicurus than most any other commentator, but that definitely doesn't mean DeWitt was always right.