On May 16, 2010, at 3:35 PM, Fam. Kintziger-Karaca wrote: > hi gang , marsha > >> I think that nature is one of the most dynamic static patterns, >> but it's still pattern applied to DQ. >> >> >> Marsha > taking nature for a lead in this sentence-abstraction, is missing the point > entirely. > I think Marsha used "nature" merely as an example. > > For the point is this: > > When Stephen Hawking is speaking about time or space, he is always saying > spacetime, or timespace, > because he knows that one cannot exist without the other (quantumphysiks), > both are always present. > > Albert Einstein did the same. Based on his own theory of relativity, gravity, > time, > Einstein always said, timespace, or spacetime. Both are always present. > > > matter-antimatter > light-dark > positive-negative > space-time > time-space > > > Look closely at what Pirsig did with static/dynamic , dynamic can only exist > if static is first,... > but both need to be present.Mr Pirsig is aware of scientific evidence.And > probably this is also the reason > that the Quality-theory, as a metaphysikal branch of the unificationtheory, > is completely backwards congruent > with both relativitytheory, and quantumphysiks, as a metaphysikal branch!.. > just completely incredible, Mr Pirsig did wat Einstein, Hawking, and all > modern science are trying to reach > in physiks, but he did it for metaphysiks and compatible, with all previous > physikal knowledge. > They should really reward Mr Pirsig with the Nobel prize for this achievement.
Yes, this is very much like "form is emptiness, emptiness is form": interdependence. If Bohr and Heisenberg were alive, I am sure they would appreciate the MoQ. At least, Bohr would. I feel relieved when I read that the Quantum perspective is beyond common sense explanation. > the marriage with Quality, is not in conflict with their both > dependence-identities. > > mind this , nobody ever succeeded to develop the unification theory, not even > Einstein > or Hawking.The unification theory lost his possible use , after the > Qantumtheory adulted Ahh, but the Cern Adventure is suppose to prove Hawking's unification theory ;-) Not to be mean, but I watched the first program of his new television series (Apple TV), and it was childish. I haven't watch the second because the first was such a disappointment. What he is he trying to drum up money for research? Awful! > This is nowedays called , "the standard model" And the calculation for spin is not just mathematics, it is real! ;-) > Statement of the day(mine), Quality for standard model!! Entanglement seems a high quality idea. I'm soon going to be learning a bit about black holes. Can't wait to hear it, but it's not a matter of hearing is believing. > So, dynamic static patterns was a good assumption marsha, but you need to > switch to static/dynamic. If you're meaning my explanation to Ham, it was simply a terrible way to phrase it. > > Bye , marsha > Adrie(drinking som belgian beer). > Enjoy! Marsha ___ 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/md/archives.html
