[John]
Interesting distinction, then. I don't quite get it. Let me
ponder.... Nope. You don't make sense.
You can't distinctify between reacting dynamically and potential for
dynamic reaction because the only way you can know that something has
the potential
to react dynamically, is that it does.
[Arlo]
Let me try to explain myself this way. Substitute "energetically" for
"dynamically". You can see a variety of responses for "energetically"
ranging from "less energetically" (lethargically, sluggish, etc.) to
"more energetically" (vigorously, quickly, etc.). So its actually a
change in the response.
When I said instead that its not a change in the response, but a
greater repertoire to which to respond, its like one responds "with
the same level energetically" but with a greater range of possible
responses. Its not a change from sluggish to vigorous response, but a
vigorous response in both cases but one being able to act from a
greater range of potential.
Does that make sense? Because it does to me. ;-)
This is a little bit of a tangent in this thread, so I'll drop it if
you are still not convinced.
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
