[MD] sideways drifting

[Case]

[Marsha]
I've read both the Capra and Zukav books and 
thought them excellent.  I was hoping their might 
be something new written and translated by 
Buddhist scientists.  And the MOQ is definitely a 
world view I deeply appreciate.  But why stop there.

[Case]
I am thinking they didn't. There is a "Tao of 'just about everything'". It's
almost as ubiquitous as "'Fill in the Blank' for Dummies" and most popular
accounts of physics at least nod at eastern thought.

[Marsha]
Ahh, but modern life is too easy to poke fun of 
because it doesn't make any kind of sense.

[Case]
Ahh, the common theme of sarcasm... I think my favorite writers have that in
common. But in the case of Adams his work really is multidimensional and has
a life of its own. I see his take on probability as far more profound than
even he might have been willing to let on.

[Case]
>As an artist though wouldn't you say the Picasso, Dali and Escher are all
>efforts to break with at Newtonian world view?

[Marsha]
Yes, they have made great efforts in breaking the 
Newtonian world view.  But this book, and I'm not 
yet half way through it, purports to build a new 
improved scientifically-based-and-tested cultural 
cosmology (but not the final or absolute 
cosmology).   And if it could be done, what would 
it look like?   How would it sound?  What words 
would be chosen and what would they mean.  How 
would it transmit comfort and acceptance?   And 
how would it sit on a canvas?  Maybe the website 
for the Hubble Telescope might give a hint.

         http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/
[Case]
As lovely as they are I think when most people look at them they still see
billiard balls, particulate matter and "real stuff" not probability
distributions and Chaos coalescing.