[MD] Quantum Physics

PhaedrusWolff at carolina.rr.com PhaedrusWolff at carolina.rr.com
Sat Dec 2 16:18:41 PST 2006


> Hello everyone
> 
> >From: Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>
> >Reply-To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> >To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> >Subject: Re: [MD] Quantum Physics
> >Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:41:38 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >
> >      [Ant]
> > > To say quantum physics is "The interaction point
> > > between [all] DQ and SQ"
> > > doesn't seem to lay right with me as that same
> > > sentence could be describing
> > > the continual interaction between an artist and a
> > > canvass or other
> > > interactions which are part of the macro world (for
> > > instance, in the
> > > biological and social realms) rather the micro
> > > world.  In other words, the
> > > definition you give above is too reductionist
> > > (towards ontological
> > > materialism)!
> >
> >      Not if you are aware that the code of art is an
> >event for all levels, as dq is split from sq.  So, the
> >"The interaction point between [all] DQ and SQ" is ok,
> >except for somebody put [all] in that sentence.  Yet,
> >again, quality talk doesn't notice distinctions, but
> >if we are discerning and making distinctions then,
> >yes, quantum physics can't be "The interaction point
> >between [all] DQ and SQ", yet, quantum physics is
> >""The interaction point between DQ and SQ".  (Notice
> >[all] is gone.)
> 
> Hi SA
> 
> If quality talk doesn't notice distinctions then what prevents 
> gibberish?
> Perhaps the MOQ would say quantum physics is a package of highly 
> specialized 
> intellectual patterns of value. Not at all as romantic as you make 
> it sound 
> but still highly effective.
> 
> Dan

Hi all,

What is wrong with my thinking here. On the social level, quantum 
physics is denied. You might hear the statement, “I understand 
Newtonian physics, so I can live with that, but I do not understand 
quantum physics. 

In this statement you would be describing Newtonian physics as SQ, and 
quantum physics would be DQ, “the track that leads the train.” 

Anything that has the power to change the way we understand reality, 
but has not yet been accepted, or is not yet understood well enough 
that it can fit its way into mainstream thinking would be DQ, right? 

Both Quality and quantum physics are still in the DQ stages(?)

Chin



More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list