ArloKrimel,
"All things tend towards patterns..."? I'm out! - Marsha
At 11:20 AM 3/22/2009, you wrote:
[Arlo]
"Static inorganic patterns" are merely those that are very, very, very
highly probable. They are not "held static", they are "static" by virtue of
having an extreme degree of probability based on subatomic particles
responding
to their environment.
All things tend towards patterns of repeated preferences; atoms and
squirrels
and people and cultures and math equations. But this never removes "chance"
from the zero-moment. Agree?
[Krimel]
Yes, following Newton there was this brief hope that Natural Laws could be
identified and chance could be driven from nature in general and human
affairs in particular. That dream was short lived and instead it was
realized the natural laws are probability statements reflecting very high
degrees of probability.
[Arlo]
Well, I'd say "nothing" is dynamic. Period. Dynamic is the undefined
uncertainty of the zero-moment. Whenever we see "something" we are seeing
"static patterns", patterns of preferred response.
But in the sense that these "static patterns" are always responding to that
zero-moment, they are always in a state of flux on some level, in some ways.
"Static" is an illusion. It is a Gestalt that we see on the flux of the
cosmos.
[Krimel]
Exactly, "static" and "dynamic" are complementary terms that describe
relative degrees of uncertainty. Just as static patterns like mountain
change over time and even something as solid as a diamond is composes of
whirring carbon atoms the world is Heraclitian, ever changing. "Static" just
means changing slowly our within boundaries and "dynamic" mean changing fast
or varying widely. Either term may be applied to the same phenomena
depending on one's perspective.
Also it is important to note that nothing can be completely dynamic either.
For example, efforts to develop a way of generating truly random numbers
have proven difficult because every known technique produces some kind of
internal bias. And even if such a technique were found, it might not
function as intended since a purely random process can produce a trillion
heads if a coin is tossed often enough. That would certainly "appear" to be
biased and not very helpful.
[Krimel]
Right the MoQ is not about a particular map. It is about cartography.
[Arlo]
Yep. That's how I see it too.
[Krimel]
Why do you think this is so difficult, especially for people familiar with
Pirsig?
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/
.
_____________
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.
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/
