I would guess the difference might even be ethimological in the sense of
what one understands by Chaos; If it refers to the Chaos theory approach,
then of course, there is still patterns, and it is considered
deterministic, if one refers to random, it's then non-deterministic and
there is no order.
Regards all,
-rv,
> You believe that there is Order in everything, even in Chaos. We just
> haven't found how the Order works in Chaos. For every effect there is a
> cause. A.K.A: "God does not roll dice."
>
> I believe that there is no Order within Chaos. DQ isn't another form of SQ.
> DQ is separate from SQ. A.K.A: There are dice rolls and there are no dice
> rolls. It's a sliding scale between the two. Kind of like an equilibrium for
> a chemistry solution.
>
> Is this an accurate summation?
>
> Sincerely,
> Matt Coughlan
>
> >From: "pclark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: MD Random patterns.
> >Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:44:20 -0600
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >clark says: Subatomic particles do not make choices.
> >
> >Coughlan says: This goes against the whole theory of MOQ. You are assuming
> >the above statement. MOQ states that particles DO make choices. So does
> >quantum mechanics. They value certain probabilities over others. Isn't that
> >"making a choice"?
> >
> >Clark says,
> > Randomly falling into a possible niche that has been prepared previously
> >is not making a choice. All possibilities will be tried. Some will allow
> >further progress, others will not. Those niches that allow further progress
> >will allow the faller to be modified and become fit for another niche. In
> >this way Quality will drive the process toward further truths. All of this
> >will have value and morality simply by virtue of being compatible with the
> >process. Up until the advent of awareness and sentience there will be no
> >choice in the chain of possibilities. Awareness and sentience will allow
> >some modification to be made in the chain of possibilities but we must keep
> >in mind that the structure of reality goes all the way back to the big
> >bang.
> >
> >
> >Matt,
> > Coughlan says: Yep, this is a trap. Remember, in MOQ it goes like this:
> >Quality ----> DQ
> > |
> > |
> > \/
> > SQ---->1)inorganic
> > 2)organic
> > 3)social
> > 4)intellectual
> >
> >Clark says,
> > I think that your diagram supports my contention that Quality is not a
> >product of the human mind but is the function on which the structure of the
> >universe is hung. If I replace some of the words we should have a better
> >picture.
> >
> > Big Bang equals Quality
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > Inorganic
> > Biological
> > Social
> > Intellectual
> >
> >Note that this is a deterministic diagram.
> >
> >Clark says,
> > Matt, I agree with you that free will and determinism are the same
> >thing. They become indidstinuishable because of complexity. Ken Clark
> >
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
---------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Il vaudrait mieux pour dieu qu'il n'existe pas" Albert Camus
so... get MOOed! @ KccMOO http://moo.kcc.hawaii.edu:9999
-------------------------------------------------------------
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
