Goodie! Goodie! And I didn't even need to bring you a polished apple...
On Sep 18, 2010, at 1:43 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > nice reply. > i do not own a conquered field of knowledge, but the field of knowlegde is > asking to be conquered. > for the little details, wiki shows very little contamination or distortion, > btw , i worked on a lot of pages > But i use a pen name; maybe i will tell you all about it sometime, i see a > lot of improvement in your postings. > > I still remember a conversation you made about the bees , the county's > providing support for bee-keeping and stuff > still remember i liked it , very native, pure.Stay good Marsha. > > i took note of your points. > > > 2010/9/18 MarshaV <[email protected]> > >> >> Adrie, >> >> Please note that the address to the full text for both book reviews and >> response were available for further research. I was misleading no one. >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 18, 2010, at 12:51 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: >> >>> so what i meant to say , marsha, is that your article lead is leading >> people >>> to things like this >>> We really need to stay in tune with all off this material , Marsha, i >> really >>> think we need to pay attention. >>> If whe start stepping over details, we have no case, we cannot go to the >>> forrest if there are no trees. >>> >>> >>> Quote ANT PIRSIG, >>> Ant: >>> Yes, I think it is, though I’m not too sure about the “illusion” part; >>> “appearance” might be a better word. Anyway (in the context of the >>> SODV paper), this is what Pirsig wrote to me about space: >>> “I have thought about Bell’s theorem and what it might mean for >>> the MOQ and so far have concluded that this theorem is just more of >>> the same subject/object mess. ‘Local’ and ‘non-local’ presume a >>> physical space. Physical space is a subjective intellectual pattern, >>> which is presumed to correspond to an objective inorganic pattern. >>> These patterns are so entrenched they are some of the last to disappear >>> during the enlightenment process, but before pure Dynamic Quality is >>> understood they must go. The ‘nothingness’ of Buddhism has nothing >>> to do with the ‘nothingness’ of physical space. That’s one of the >>> advantages in calling it ‘Quality’ instead of ‘nothingness.’ It reduces >>> the confusion.” (Letter to Ant, June 1st 1996) >>> >>> >>> >>> shit , i forgot to EXALT it a little bit >>> >>> >>> 2010/9/18 ADRIE KINTZIGER <[email protected]> >>> >>>> EMPHASED!! >>>> >>>> 2010/9/18 ADRIE KINTZIGER <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> "Exalt , well , no, i emhased it virtually to show the point that >> article's >>>>> like this contain >>>>> falsifications 'an sich' embedded or by association with occult >> science. >>>>> >>>>> -concider it or don't, well, leads like this are taking other people >>>>> towards the article without pointing out >>>>> towards the conflicting matters. probably you were not aware of this , >> and >>>>> probably people following the lead >>>>> are not , but leaving a part out of its contexts in this way is >> dangerous >>>>> and arose my suspicion. >>>>> >>>>> And of course , no , i am not a physician, i never said i was , i work >> in >>>>> a car factory,with my hands. >>>>> But i'm better than a shitload of them.I was studying all the books you >>>>> see, and i think its a good idea >>>>> for you to do so, this is encouraging. >>>>> Its not a very good idea to jump over the material. >>>>> >>>>> Like the Bell's theoreme,one has to be aware of all this kind of >>>>> contamination. >>>>> >>>>> Greetz, the log lady, Burps! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2010/9/18 MarshaV <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Adrie, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I've posted a lot of stuff. Consider it or don't. Maybe the book >>>>>> will arrive today, and I will have more to post. >>>>>> >>>>>> By the way, are you a physicist? And why you exalt what >>>>>> you point out? I don't. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Marsha >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 18, 2010, at 11:13 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> But you forgot the rest of the article Marsha >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I isolated a part from the article further on as i am very good in >>>>>> Nonlocal >>>>>>> &local reality's. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> comment on isolated part >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Their treatment of two-slit interference ranks right up there with >> (but >>>>>>> differs interestingly from) Feynman’s famous “comes in lumps” >> approach, >>>>>> and >>>>>>> their nontechnical description of Bell’s theorem is one of the best >>>>>> I’ve >>>>>>> seen, and by far the least mathematical. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3 problems >>>>>>> trying to ridicule Feynman is not a very good idea, this is adressed >> at >>>>>> the >>>>>>> autor. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Bell theorem. >>>>>>> The theorem is specifically rejected by most of the scientifical >>>>>>> world,because its a limp home formula. >>>>>>> it is under controverse since it was stated.Its rubbish. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> MR PIRSIG, specifically rejects the theoreme, in one of his >> annotations >>>>>> on >>>>>>> LILA'S CHILD,in a earlier stage of history. >>>>>>> He recognised very early that it was crap, and i happen to agree with >>>>>> him >>>>>>> and 99% of science. >>>>>>> PIRSIG rejects it for a reason, this is very easy to find back. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nb, i was already pointing out in a conversation with Mr Buchanan, >> some >>>>>> time >>>>>>> ago, that PIRSIG rejects the theoreme >>>>>>> It is still to be found back in the archives, or in the >>>>>> annotations >>>>>>> made upon LILA. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> this is only 1 leech to kill, there are more in the article... >>>>>>> sincerely yours , Pontius PILATUS, landlord of judea, the man on the >>>>>>> mountain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2010/9/18 MarshaV <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> from American Journal of Physics Review of Quantum Enigma: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Take space-time, for example. We organize our perceptions into >> events, >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> for many purposes it is illuminating to represent those events as >>>>>> points in >>>>>>>> an abstract four-dimensional continuum. This is so useful that most >> of >>>>>> us >>>>>>>> reify this abstract scheme, believing that we inhabit a world that >> is >>>>>> such a >>>>>>>> four- (or, for a few of us, ten-) dimensional continuum. The >>>>>> reification of >>>>>>>> abstract time and space goes so far back in human history that it’s >>>>>> easy to >>>>>>>> miss the intellectual sleight of hand. The reification of electric >> and >>>>>>>> magnetic fields is more recent but also came to be taken for >> granted, >>>>>> until >>>>>>>> it started to unravel (for some of us) with the arrival of quantum >>>>>>>> electrodynamics. The strongest hints of how we have been fooling >>>>>> ourselves >>>>>>>> emerge when we try to reify quantum states, and thereby run into >> “the >>>>>>>> measurement problem” and “quantum nonlocality.” >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://quantumenigma.com/reviews-our-responses/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> parser >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ___ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> parser >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> parser >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> parser >>> 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 >> >> >> >> ___ >> >> >> 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 >> > > > > -- > parser > 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 ___ 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
