Jorge:
Recurrence, from verb recur in its senses of: "to
happen, come up or show up repeatedly".
In this sense of recurrence, [&$#] is Not a
pattern; neither is this: [&$#&$#&$#]. It starts to
look like a pattern only when the number of
repetitions is (sufficiently) large, like in this for
instance:
[&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#&$#]
for here, the unit [&$#] keeps happening, showing up
or coming up "repeatedly".
From this point of view a rock is not a pattern, a
thought is not a pattern, a pipe is not a pattern, a
value is not a pattern. In my view, an important
distinction. Ron writes for instance (in an answer to
SA):
"DOES NOT Pirsig state that subjects, objects, trees,
rocks, You, me, are all patterns of value?"
To which I can only say that, if he did write that,
he wasn't talking about patterns in the sense I am
talking about here; this sens reflects, I think, the
common-use sense of the word.
Ron:
Hello Jorge,
A rock is a pattern of energy. Energy in the pattern of atoms
Repeated in its configurations as molecules. It modulates as
It repeats in time and structure radiating and absorbing energy.
It most certainly is a collection of patterns in flux.
Pirsig states that value creates patterns, all static patterns.
Rocks included as well as thoughts about rocks.
This was the big epiphany. I still don't see why SA and Magnus
Are giving me so much resistance on this.
Pirsig ties MoQ with Quantum theory in his SDOV paper.
MoQ covers the entire universe. Every last bit.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
