[MD] Chaos Crystallised.

[Case]

Mark,

First thanks for pointing out the importance of these terms to the MoQ.
Overall you are on the right track with this. I have an overall observation
and question about your use of the term chaos. Pirsig seems to use chaos in
the sense of randomness, formlessness and patternlessness. Is that the sense
in which you are using it? 

[Mark]
Question 1. 'Are Chaos and DQ the same thing'?
Answer: No.
 
[Case]
Are Chaos and Quality the same thing?
Are Quality and DQ the same thing in your view?

[Mark] 
Question 2. If Chaos is not DQ and if Chaos is not structure, what is  it?
Answer: Unstructured relationships between sq simples.
The answer i wish to work with involves describing Chaos in terms of sq:  
Chaos is unstructured relationship between sq simples.
This allows further assertions:
a. sq simples are capable of becoming coherent. Coherence is a state between
sq simples which is excellent and opaque to DQ.
b. The opposite of Chaos is stasis.
c. Primary sq simples may be either: completely static, not even Chaotic!
or Aspects of Chaos itself.
(I favour the possibility that sq simples are aspects of Chaos; Chaos is  
noise; complete absence of unity: Chaos all the way down.)
d. There are no MoQ levels below Chaos.
While complete stasis may be the furthest away from DQ it may be possible to
get, complete stasis may be the waste product of evolution?
The original state may be Chaos, and Chaos may have more value than complete
stasis.

[Case]
Perhaps I missed the discussion of sq simples could you elaborate on what
these are? Admittedly I am not clear on this point but it would seem that
coherence is stasis. 

In what sense would stasis be the waste product of evolution? Isn't
evolution about changes in species (static patterns of evolution) over time?

 
[Mark]
Question 3. If Chaos was overcome in order for Inorganic patterns to
establish themselves, was chaos a transition phase between pre-inorganic and
organic patterns, or is chaos pre-inorganic value itself?
Answer: Evidence for the transition view may be found in the  following:

'In the chaos of social patterns a wild new intellectual experimentation  
could now take place. Abstract art, discordant music, Freudian
psychoanalysis, the Sacco-Vanzetti trial, contempt for alcoholic
prohibition.  Literature emphasized the struggle of the noble, free-thinking
individual against the crushing oppression of evil social conformity.'
(Lila. ch. 22)
 
This quote seems to suggest that chaos is helpful for higher level advance.
Chaos weakens relationships at a lower levels while the immediately higher  
level becomes more coherent.

[Case]
>From the stand point of modern physics there was never a time before there
where inorganic patterns. Time, space, energy and matter were all created in
the same instant. You move here from the foundation of inorganic matter to
literature that's quite a jump some transition would be helpful.

[Mark] 
But it may also be inferred that Chaos was, at an early phase of value
evolution, a primary component of reality: The inference may be drawn from
the suggestion that coherence is increasing; if we have evidence for an
increase in coherence then it may be inferred that chaos is that which is
being left behind.

[Case]
On a cosmic scale things are expanding and energy is dissipating. Locally
this is not the case as solar radiation provides a constant source of new
energy. This influx of dynamic energy is what powers the rise in coherence
locally. How would you relate your view of chaos to entropy?

[Mark] 
I considered how the MoQ explains how Inorganic patterns are used to create

Biological patterns:
'Phædrus thought this ambiguity of carbon's bonding preferences was the  
situation the weak Dynamic subatomic forces needed. Carbon bonding was a
balanced mechanism they could take over. It was a vehicle they could steer
to all sorts of freedom by selecting first one bonding preference and then
another in an almost unlimited variety of ways.' (Lila. ch. 11)
 
Question 4: 'What would DQ use in order to overcome Chaos to create  
structured Inorganic patterns?'
Answer: A Self similar Harmonic.
A self similar harmonic would Crystallise Chaos at a saturation point or  
'sweet spot' within the chaotic relationships of sq patterns.
 
If chaos is unrelation, then it may be legitimate to conjecture  there is 
more than one variety of unrelation. Therefore, a particular variety of
unrelation may be more open to crystallisation than all the others - and
this may be what DQ used?

[Case]
Wouldn't a self similar harmonic be a coherent patterned that emerges from
chaos? Could you elaborate on this idea of chaos as "unrelation"? When you
say that chaos flows and crystallizes are you being metaphorical or is that
part of your view of chaos?

[Mark]
(Although this is pure conjecture it is based upon notions already found in

MoQ literature.)
 
Far reaching consequence of the Chaos  Crystallised conjecture:
 
A. The original self similar harmonic may resonate throughout all levels of

the MoQ?
It would therefore be no surprise when intellectual patterns such as
mathematics and geometric modelling fit so well with inorganic behaviour.
It would therefore be no surprise that Music and art resonate so well with
mathematics.

[Case]
How are you using harmonic here? I have always assumed that to some extent
our intellectual patterns correspond well to the inorganic world because we
designed them to do so.

[Mark]
B. This may provide an elegant explanation to the problem of keeping DQ
undefined while explaining why harmony is so Dynamic: DQ created harmonics
as a fundamental static aspect of Inorganic quality - i.e. the cosmos -
Harmony is always there as a fundamental aspect of reality, and yet not DQ.
Therefore, harmonic relationships are capable of becoming ever more coherent
(open to DQ) at higher levels.

[Case]
If you are saying that harmony is DQ resonating how would dissonance factor
into your analysis? If harmonic relationships become more coherent aren't
they in effect becoming more static?

[Mark] 
C. Many have given me feedback concerning coherence and wanted to call it  
resonance or harmony.
Now it becomes possible to define resonance and harmony as sq components of

coherence which open up to DQ.
In other words, the original self similar harmonic, while ultimately a  
fundamental aspect of inorganic reality, may also evolve at higher levels.
At certain nodes more evolved harmonics still resonate with the fundamental.
Artists (that is to say all human creatives from musicians to
mathematicians), 'Tune in' so to speak.

[Case]
I am not clear on what you mean by coherence. Harmony and resonance have to
do with vibrations or oscillation. Coherence has to do with logical
connectedness. Could you explain the relationship of these terms?

When you talk about DQ and sq components are you saying that DQ and sq exist
in perfect isolation from each other?
 
[Mark]
D. Thus Harmony and Resonance are not synonyms for DQ. This one is
effectively dealt with.

[Case]
I await clarification of terminology before commenting on this one.

[Mark] 
E. To Ian (psybertron) this may provide an answer to your warning that  
coherence must be distinguished from equilibrium?
Equilibrium may be seen as a settled state close to the fundamental  
harmonic, while coherence is a modification of the fundamental harmonic
induced  by DQ.

[Mark] 
F. It may even be conjectured that Dark matter and Dark energy are  harmonic

nodes within the fundamental chaos that are outside observable  inorganic sq

patterns.
 
MoQ cosmogony would then be a matter of Chaos as sq unrelation becoming ever
more coherent sq relationships.

[Case]
Once again this is a local phenomenon driven by sunbeams.

[Mark]
This description leaves DQ undefined yet central to sq, because: 'Dynamic  
Quality is not structured and yet it is not chaotic.'

[Case]
How does your view of chaos used above take into consideration nonlinear
dynamics or deterministic Chaos? In modern accounts chaos is totally
deterministic and rule governed but total unpredictable. It would seem that
deterministic chaos squares pretty well with the idea of undefined Quality.

In summary I would say you are using good terms (chaos, harmony, resonance,
coherence, resolution is another you might consider) to frame the discussion
but I think more clarity is needed as to what you mean by them.