Hi John, Thanks for pointing out my inexact use of error¹! I was trying to exemplify a difference between metaphysical logic and scientific logic to emphasize that physics has a different standard for truth than metaphysics. Imho in a metaphysical setting a mathematical logic of dividing 1 by SQ would produce DQ by analogy since SQ, 1 are defined and DQ is undefined . The point I am trying to make is that mathematical logic, is not the same as metaphysical logic. I know it sounds stupid to say that logic is not logic, but up to now there is no provision for evolution in a rigid logic of numbers. Metaphysics trumps numbers to use a different metaphor. ³Where did the beauty go?² Joe
On 6/26/09 2:20 PM, "John Carl" <[email protected]> wrote: > Error is not exactly what you get with dividing by zero. That's only on a > computer cuz computer's can't handle deep truth. "Infinity" is just as > valid an answer, as is "Mu". > J Carl > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Platt, >> >> I am sorry that you do not value the tremendous contributions mathematical >> logic has made to our present description of reality. In ordinary >> mathematics when you divide a number by 0 logic is destroyed and you get an >> error message. >> >> Imho Pirsig made more apparent this error in a metaphysics for mathematical >> logic and proposed that 0, DQ, remain undefined. By leaving 0 DQ undefined >> in terms of 1, then division by DQ becomes the basis for a logical >> metaphysics, evolution. MOQ adds this element to mathematical logic. MOQ >> is >> a real metaphysics, instead of the metaphysics of descriptive logic SOM >> where division by 0 leads to error. Lila is DQ/SQ. >> >> Joe >> >> >> On 6/25/09 4:44 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Joe, >>> >>> Your statement arises from SOM stance where a subject beholds an >>> object such as the formula you cite. From an MOQ stance, Beauty >>> (Quality) uses our eyes to see with. As Pirsig said, "It isn't Lila that >> has >>> quality; it's Quality that has Lila." >>> >>> Platt >>> >>> >>> >>> On 25 Jun 2009 at 16:21, Joseph Maurer wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Platt, >>>> >>>> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A2+B2=C2. Absolutely beautiful! >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/24/09 6:16 AM, "Platt Holden" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not only where did the beauty go, but where did the beauty come from? >> As >>>>> usual, science has no answer nor any capability of discovering an >> answer. >>>>> Something besides quarks, leptons and bosons is going on. I nominate >> the >>>>> creative force of DQ. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:54 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Masanobu's refutation of Reductionism: >>>>>> Science taking Nature apart to try and understand it is like a Dr. >>>>>> analyzing >>>>>> the beauty of a woman by dissecting her. Where did the beauty go? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------ >>>>>> Doing Good IS Being >>>>>> ------------ >>>>>> 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/ > Error is not exactly what you get with dividing by zero. That's only on a > computer cuz computer's can't handle deep truth. "Infinity" is just as > valid an answer, as is "Mu". > J Carl > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Platt, >> >> I am sorry that you do not value the tremendous contributions mathematical >> logic has made to our present description of reality. In ordinary >> mathematics when you divide a number by 0 logic is destroyed and you get an >> error message. >> >> Imho Pirsig made more apparent this error in a metaphysics for mathematical >> logic and proposed that 0, DQ, remain undefined. By leaving 0 DQ undefined >> in terms of 1, then division by DQ becomes the basis for a logical >> metaphysics, evolution. MOQ adds this element to mathematical logic. MOQ >> is >> a real metaphysics, instead of the metaphysics of descriptive logic SOM >> where division by 0 leads to error. Lila is DQ/SQ. >> >> Joe >> >> >> On 6/25/09 4:44 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Joe, >>> >>> Your statement arises from SOM stance where a subject beholds an >>> object such as the formula you cite. From an MOQ stance, Beauty >>> (Quality) uses our eyes to see with. As Pirsig said, "It isn't Lila that >> has >>> quality; it's Quality that has Lila." >>> >>> Platt >>> >>> >>> >>> On 25 Jun 2009 at 16:21, Joseph Maurer wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Platt, >>>> >>>> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A2+B2=C2. Absolutely beautiful! >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/24/09 6:16 AM, "Platt Holden" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not only where did the beauty go, but where did the beauty come from? >> As >>>>> usual, science has no answer nor any capability of discovering an >> answer. >>>>> Something besides quarks, leptons and bosons is going on. I nominate >> the >>>>> creative force of DQ. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:54 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Masanobu's refutation of Reductionism: >>>>>> Science taking Nature apart to try and understand it is like a Dr. >>>>>> analyzing >>>>>> the beauty of a woman by dissecting her. Where did the beauty go? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------ >>>>>> Doing Good IS Being >>>>>> ------------ >>>>>> 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/ >>>>>> >>>>> 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/ >>>> >>>> >>>> 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/ >>> >>> >>> 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/ >> >> >> >> 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/ >> > > 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/
