[MD] Chaos Crystallised.

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

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: Hello Case.
Please don't ascribe any of this to the MoQ?
I'm pushing the boundary and it may be a mistake. It will be my  mistake.
Re: Chaos. I think there may be two senses in which Pirsig uses the term  
Chaos.
The first is a metaphor for disrutpion.*
The second seems to be that of beyond the, 'laws' of a structured  
metaphysics.
The second term is applied in Lila to pre-inorganic value.
If we think about the term, 'Pattern' itself, i think we can get away with  
postulating at least two types of patterns:
1. Structured patterns.
2. Unstructured patterns.
I am suggesting Chaos is Unstructured patterns.
The sq simples of these Unstructured patterns are values.

[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: Quality is a Mystical monism and DQ is a Metaphysical monism in my  
view.
They are not the same in my view; to predicate the term Quality is to  
introduce concepts and Mystics leave them alone.

[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.
 
Mark: There wasn't a discussion of sq simples. This is a technical term  used 
in philosophy.
I think sq simples are values. At rock bottom these values do not value  
patterns.
Coherence required more thought after it was initially introduced because  it 
became clear that it can look like stasis as you point out.
This was inadequate.
The examples of coherence in, 'The edge of chaos' are anything but  static!
'Coherence' does a, 'Robert Pirsig' on DQ.
RP defined Quality in spite of himself, and Coherence defines DQ in terms  of 
sq in spite of myself.
If Chaos and Stasis are taken as extremes, then Coherence is a point  between 
these extremes; not a mathematical point between, but a point of  excellence. 
Coherence seems to be on the edge of chaos, but it's not  chaos.
Coherence is not stasis.
 
[Case]
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: Roses grow very well in waste product. Nothing like waste product for  
Roses.
The Earth's crust is not evolving much, but this thin skin of surface  
between the complete stasis of subterranean and burn is where evolution is  really 
accelerating. Life needs a bit of it all - Chaos, Coherence and Stasis,  or so 
it may seem?

[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: The suggestion is that, cosmogonically speaking, 'Time, space, energy  
and matter' is value as Chaos crystallising.
The above quote, as Ian (psybertson) pointed out, is a metaphor for  
disruption. *
Having said that, i don't see a problem with: Chaos as unstructured sq  
simples of a high level.
(The simples in question being Social sq patterns. But now the unstructured  
relationship is BETWEEN sq patterns, not sq patterns qua unstructured  
patterns).

[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: Good question.
Entropy as Thermal Death is complete uniform stasis and this fits with the  
model - waste product at the inorganic level.
Local coherence is running at the edge between two extremes - Interstellar  
freeze and Solar burn.

[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: Our experience of music indicates that Octaves sound the  same yet 
different.
This is the notion behind all self similarity, and  it's what drove me to 
this in the first place.
I'm guessing that if chaos is, 'unrelation' of values which do not value  
patterns', then there may be very many different varieties of  unrelation?
Unrelation is difficult to imagine, but that doesn't mean it can't  exist?
The MoQ suggests there is always a betterness in everything, so why not  
postulate a, 'better' 'unrelation'?
Better, in the sense that DQ chose it to manipulate crystallisation.
Once the crystallisation is there it will make its presence felt at all  
levels.
 
[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: Let's look at it this way:
All sq patterns are aspects of One DQ.
Therefore all sq configurations are the same, 'stuff.'
If harmony is a fundamental imprint basic to early sq patterns of  value, 
then we may speculate that harmony becomes an influence throughout  subsequent 
value levels?
I am in no way suggesting a form of determinism here.
All i am saying is that there may be a fundamental coherent harmonic  there 
to influence subsequent levels.
Perhaps this is the birth of coherence?
Perhaps sq simples are coherences in chaotic relationships?
New levels of evolution are open to Dynamic influence so any future  
resonance has a static basis from which new evolutionary progress can  spring.
Design may be thought of as simply reaching the best position within sq  
reality. (This is stated in TEOC)
 
[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: DQ has to left out of it.
Harmony isn't DQ resonating, Harmony is an implicit feature of any self  
similar structure.
All structures are sq.
However, some structures are coherent!
Dissonance is exciting. It's pushing close to chaos. But at the same time  
it's inviting Dynamic intervention.
Complete dissonance is chaotic isn't it?
You've hit upon a conceptual problem with coherence when you ask is it in  
effect becoming more static?
If i answer yes, it is with the proviso that, with apparent paradox, it is  
becoming more open to DQ.
But the paradox dissolves if we leave DQ undefined: Then coherence becomes  
precisely more Dynamic and not more static.
(Remember we are doing to DQ what RP did to Quality.)

[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?
 
Mark: Harmony and Resonance are exhibited between similarities  reinforcing.
Coherence does the same thing at a very dense state.

[Case]
When you talk about DQ and sq components are you saying that DQ  and sq exist
in perfect isolation from each other?
 
Mark: The whole coherence centred enquiry is static.
As DQ is the essence of sq then all talk of sq cannot be divorced from  DQ.

[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: Yes, i love it.
Sunbeams are electromagnetic patterns in the same locality as gravitational  
patterns and mass patterns, etc.
These form the basis of the inorganic level only.
And this is cosmos wide - even our galaxy stands in relation to the great  
attractor.

[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.
 
Mark: I am using the term Chaos in its old sense: Total lack of  order.

[Case]
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.
 
Mark: As this stands i would state:
1. Chaos. Unstructured relationships between sq simples. (Simples are  values 
that do not value structure)
2. Harmony. Resonance between similars.
3. Resonance. Simple Coherence.
3. Coherence. Far from equilibrium state open to Dynamic influence.
4. Resolution. ???
 
Many thanks Case, you've put me through the mental gym.
Love,
Mark