Hi Marsha,

Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
Mark

On Dec 1, 2011, at 10:52 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:

> Greetings Mark,
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mark:
>>>>>> What I was trying to say about quantum mechanics is that it is a
>>>>>> mathematical description of matter.  The notion that matter is
>>>>>> non-local arises from how the math is used.  Therefore non-locality is
>>>>>> not a result of matter actually being non-local, it is a result of the
>>>>>> math used to describe it.  The problem with physicists (imo) is that
>>>>>> they think that the math equations actually ARE matter.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Marsha:
>>>>> Patterns are ever-changing, conditionally codependent, impermanent and 
>>>>> conceptually constructed, whether intellectual, social, biological or 
>>>>> inorganic. Within the quantum world, there is the measurement problem.  
>>>>> And hope for interconnectedness.
>>>> 
>>>> [Mark]
>>>> As you know, I have a problem with "patterns" since it seem to rigid
>>>> for me.  In my opinion, patterns arise after conceptualization.  This
>>>> would draw a line between DQ and conceptualization, which I do not
>>>> believe is quite accurate.  But, that is just me.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Marsha:
>>> Here is my understanding of patterns.  Please note, though I state
>>> that all patterns are conceptualized, that does not mean that patterns
>>> are conceptual (all concepts).  For I do not.  Patterns may very well,
>>> at the very least, have a perceptual piece.  Here it is again:
>>> 
>>> I think it best to consider static patterns of value from two different
>>> points of view.  One would be the nature of all patterns:  conditionally
>>> co-dependent, impermanent, ever-changing and conceptualized.
>>> A second would be by categorization by evolutionary function -
>>> inorganic, biological, social and intellectual – into their four-level,
>>> hierarchical structure.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Mark:
>> Yes, I think I see what you are presenting.  I would use a systems
>> approach rather than a pattern approach to convey what I believe you
>> are saying.  A system is dynamic, a pattern seems more static to me.
>> 
>> Personally, I approach MoQ more from the inside looking out, than the
>> outside looking in.  That is, I do not see myself as a pattern,
>> although I can create them.  We are not actually devided up into four
>> levels, nor do we need to abide by conditionality.  Again, all just my
>> opinion.
>> 
>> Cheers, Mark
> 
> It is very much a system, or process, when it is understood that static 
> quality exists in stable patterns relative to other patterns.  Patterns 
> depend upon innumerable causes and conditions (patterns), depend upon parts 
> and the collection of parts (patterns), depend upon conceptual designation 
> (patterns). !Patterns have no independent existence!  Further, these patterns 
> represent "what works" depending upon on an individual's static pattern of 
> life history.

Gotcha
> 
> I know that you know that there is no inside/outside dichotomy.  The 
> fundamental nature of static quality is Dynamic Quality.  

Well, here we get into an awareness of Reality as it presents itself to us.  I 
consider a conceptual framework to be part of reality.  So I would say that the 
dichotomy is real since we create it.  Else wise we are stuck in a system not 
of our own doing.  What we create conceptually is as real as what causes us to 
create it.  It is a continuum, if you will.  We cannot separate our musings 
from everything else.  To do so gives us more power than I think we have.  Our 
thought process is DQ in action, IMO.

Indeed the split between DQ and sq is a dichotomy.  As an analogy, possibly DQ 
is that from within, and sq is that from outside.  I will have to think about 
this a bit to see how the rhetoric works.
> 
> Contemplating "patterns" is very interesting.  To follow them can lead to 
> quite a realization.  Imho

Yes, I can see from your posts that it is indeed useful.

Mark
> 
> 
> 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
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

Reply via email to