Hi Steven, Thanks for the suggestion. I would be interested in learning more about applications of math to MoQ. What are your thoughts on using infinite set theory?
Mark On Aug 28, 2011, at 7:59 PM, Steven Peterson <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Mark, > > Please don't talk about things you know nothing about. I am a > mathematician and statistician. Last time I checked you are not. I am > only looking out for you best interest to help you avoid looking > stupid just as you were simply trying to help Horse by telling him he > can't talk about evolution since he is not a biologist. > > I know you are interested in raising the standard for what gets posted > in this forum. The surest way that you can help to do that would be to > unsubscribe. > > Best, > Steve > > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 8:36 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: >> Joe, Joe, Joe, >> >> How is your math these days? When an error is returned for an >> equation like 2/0, it means "Return to sender", or "Earth to Joe", or >> "What are you asking?". 2/0 asks "how many times does nothing fit >> into two?". So tell me Joe, how many times can you fit nothing into >> two if you are so fond of asking the question? This would be like >> asking how many times does Integrity fit into Beautiful?. Don't you >> think this would result in an error message from the calculator of >> MoQ? >> >> Typically evolution is described by mathematics. I am referring to >> the Evolution that is a theory in biology. It is all math based. You >> know level of adaptation, predator/prey equations, life span. All >> math! Darwin put a lot of species together in a linear (math) way. >> But, you do not need to apologize because you are obviously talking >> about a different sort of Evolution. If you explain what you mean by >> Evolution, I can respond with a rational post along those lines. >> >> When I state that "Mathematics is a form of Metaphysics", I mean >> simply this: Math is used to describe reality in the same way that MoQ >> is used to describe reality. There is no difference and each is an >> equally valid method for such a description. There is nothing more >> real about mathematics than there is for MoQ, both are static >> descriptions, and yes, they approach reality in different ways. >> Perhaps you are of the mind that somehow Math is true whereas MoQ is >> conjecture. If so, I would have to suggest that you stop bowing down >> to the religion of Scientism and see it for what it is. This is not >> to demean science; I am in love with science and make a good living >> using it. Science describes reality like a blue print describes a >> house. The blueprint is not the house, science is not reality. >> >> By way of metaphor, let me ask you this: Let's say you enter into a >> very good restaurant and a waiter gives you a menu. You ask the >> waiter what he would suggest for a meal. The waiter takes one of the >> pages of the menu and puts salt on it and suggests you eat it. >> Wouldn't you think that is kind of strange? Of course the menu is not >> the food, just like a map of Ecuador is not the country. In the same >> way, math is not reality, and physics is not either. They are all >> descriptions, all analogies. MoQ is the analogy we are working with. >> To make it work we need to use rhetoric and a great variety of >> descriptions and definitions, yes, DEFINITIONS. Else-wise we will >> just be acting silly. >> >> Cheers, >> Mark >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Joseph Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> The reply highlights the difference between language and math. Math as a >>> precise language seems to ignore analogy and metaphor procreation. Division >>> by 0 in math returns an error message, no creation. The question I was >>> asking is can evolution be described in mathematics. If the answer is yes, >>> my apologies. If, no, then metaphysics with analogy and metaphor is the >>> proper discipline to discuss evolution beyond mathematical physics. >>> >>> I have not studied extensive mathematical levels, I am operating on the >>> insight that metaphysics, and physics, do not share a common definition for >>> the reality of evolution. "Math is a form of metaphysics." >>> >>> I'm no good at tic-tac-toe. No room for disagreement except a fistfight. >>> >>> On 8/24/11 4:31 PM, "118" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Joe the Undefined Wizard, >>>> >>>> Is this a trick question? Or are you playing tic-tac-toe? >>>> >>>> By the way, are you ignoring my last email to you or are you still >>>> digesting it (burp)? >>>> >>>> Mark, the Undefined Satan. > 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
