Hello everyone ---------------------------------------- > Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 17:11:56 -0700 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] LC: Expanded Annotation 57 > >> >> >> In the MOQ, matter arises from experience, not the other way around. Time >> arises from experience as well, so it arises independently of matter. >> >> I am unsure what you mean when you say: So we just toss E=mc2 out the >> window? Equations do not arise from matter. They are ideas. They arise from >> experience independently of matter. >> > > Hi Dan, > > I wasn't talking about the equation "as" an equation, I was talking about > what the equation represents - the relativity of time and space. Hi John Okay. I understand better now. I think the MOQ would say E=MC2 is a high quality intellectual representation of reality. What it represents is bound up within our cultural mythos. As a culture, we in the West tend to be more materialistically oriented, which is why (I think) Robert Pirsig says in LILA'S CHILD that philosophic idealism is a better way for the MOQ to approach science.
>John: > There is a problem still, but not a big problem. The problem is that we > properly (if we want to be proper about it) speak of > "the space-time continuum" when we talk about this cosmic stuff because we > have evolved intellectually to the point where we understand this > relativity. Matter is pretty much the same as space, as far as I can see. > Matter is composed of space and space is composed of matter. And time is > related to both. Dan: I want to stop you here. The way I read it, you're claiming there's an external reality called space and time and you as an isolated space/time observer can discover and implement laws and theories like relativity that operate independently. However, the MOQ tells us that ideas do not originate out of external matter. Matter originates out of ideas. Look at it this way: Einstein didn't see a beam of light bend as it passed by a star but he knew it would. Reality corresponds to our vision of it. We are not isolated observers sitting on high looking down on all creation. >John: > So I would disagree with bob if he said that time was independent of matter. > And I would disagree with him if he said that time precedes matter, but I > think he said "probably" and you can't really disagree with an equivocation > so I'll just state for the record that I think the _best_ metaphysical > outlook is that the relativistic space-matter/time continuum arises from > experience, with no preference or precedence for either since they arise > together always. Dan: Though I've corresponded with Robert Pirsig a number of times I've never met him in person so I prefer showing him the respect of not using his nickname until he gives me leave to do so. I know, I know. Blame it on my father for instilling a sense of respect in me. I do. Be that as it may, I think you'll agree that the theory of relativity will only survive until something better comes along. Such is the nature of science. So it's easy to see we do not inhabit a reality of concrete form. It changes according to how we perceive reality. >John: > Although, it's a bit tautological since what is experience but the > experience of the relativistic space-matter/time continuum? which if you > didn't go any deeper than that you'd have problems, like Ham evidently does, > dealing with this as a solid metaphysical foundation. Dan: Yes, we need to probe deeper, which is what I think Robert Pirsig is telling us. Ham is an intelligent person but (from what I've seen) he is more interested in promulgating his own philosophy than he is in discussing the MOQ. >John: > However as I see it, the solid metaphysical foundation upon which the MoQ > rests is that Quality is demonstrably real and outside of or beyond the > context of either the experience-er or the experienc-ed. Once you got that, > the rest is just singing and dancing. Dan: In a sense, yes. But remember, Quality is experience. You cannot separate the two... "the experience-er or the experienc-ed" become the experiencer AND the experienced. If one changes, so does the other. >John: > And some song and dance is better than others. Dan: Yes, of course that is the whole basis for Dynamic Quality in the MOQ. Thank you, Dan _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail® goes with you. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Mobile1_052009 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/
