[MD] Crystallising Chaos.

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

<snip>

[Case]
It seems that what you are talking about is what happened  before the Big
Bang, no?
 
Mark: Hello Case.
Yes, But i avoided cosmology by suggesting this was cosmogony.
I've already committed myself to the view that the Cosmos is value.
 
Case: If so I would have to defer to Hawkings who claims, that would
be  unknowable. From the standpoint of the world as it is what ever  existed
before that point is outside of the laws of physics and has no effect  on
what came after it. Now of course that does not mean that it is not fun  to
speculate. But what standard would you use to evaluate such  speculation?
 
Mark: In the Metaphysics of Quality there's the morality called the "laws  of 
nature," by which inorganic patterns triumph over chaos...' (Lila. ch.  13)
This made me think about the nature of GOFC.
I thought that recent physics had developed the notion that there are  
something like 32 fields which existed before the Big bang, and by smashing  
particles together today physicists, 'excite' these fields and deduce their  
properties and relationships?
It's the fields they are interested in, not the particles - the particles  
are a by product.
I don't know where that leaves GOFC?
Maybe we are going to be told the fields are eternal?

Case: That said, what you or describing above is very similar to what  I
originally thought Pirsig was getting at with Quality DQ and SQ. I  would
shift the terms about a bit because this is how I have come to think  of
them but the meaning is about the same.

You have:
DQ > Chaos  / SQ
 
Mark: Hang on a mo Case.
I've tried to be sneaky and describe chaos in terms of sq.
The only way i could think of getting away with this was to describe chaos  
as an unstructured relationship between sq simples.
Under pressure to give an account of myself, i called these simples values  
which do not value structure.
Note that static and structure are not synonymous or i'm in trouble!
So what i have is:
DQ > Chaos (unstructured sq value) / sq (structured sq value)
So, i can also agree with you when you say:

Case: I would label  it:

Quality > DQ / SQ
 
Mark: Because sq includes both sq and chaos.
Am i sailing too close to the wind?

Case: I have always liked this  one because it follows a Taoist metaphysics 
which
is near and dear to my  heart. But from the stand point of even GOFC a
simpler and more monistic  formulation would be:

Chaos > order/disorder
 
Mark: A tiny tweak makes this: sq > Chaos (Unstructured sq  relationships) / 
Order (structured sq relationships)

Case: I confess  to being a bit shakey on these points so your views are 
helpful
but the one  point you keep making that bothers me is the implication that
DQ has  intention and is an active agent. Why is this important to you?
 
Mark: I can only appeal to evolution Case.
The MoQ is all about value evolution. The earliest values are tiny little  
dharmas of moral order which have evolved into huge dharmas of higher moral  
codes.
In other words, we have replaced Substance with moral order.
There appears to be an arrow of moral evolution.

Mark: Just as Biological sq values such as Cats and  Dogs  transform
Inorganic sq patterns for their own survival, so Inorganic   patterns
transform chaos for their own survival, Case: 'it is in the very  nature 
of change.'

[Case]
Do you really think that inorganic  structures are concerned with their own
survival? How so?
 
Mark: Yes, i do. It's an extrapolation from our observation of other  
patterns of behaviour.
Biological patterns protect their structures, and social groups can be very  
resistant to progress and change.
Robert Pirsig has noted that all structures have what appear to be a  Dynamic 
centre which is protected by a dead static barrier:
'This division of all biological evolutionary patterns into a  Dynamic
function and a static function continues on up through higher levels  of
evolution.  The formation of semi-permeable cell walls to let food in  and
keep poisons out is a static latch.  So are bones, shells, hide,  fur,
burrows, clothes, houses, villages, castles, rituals, symbols, laws  and
libraries.  All of these prevent evolutionary degeneration.
On  the other hand, the shift in cell reproduction from mitosis to meiosis
to  permit sexual choice and allow huge DNA diversification is a  Dynamic
advance.  So is the collective organization of cells into  metazoan
societies called plants and animals.  So are sexual choice,  symbiosis,
death and regeneration, communality, communication, speculative  thought,
curiosity and art.  Most of these, when viewed in a  substance-centered
evolutionary way are thought of as mere incidental  properties of the
molecular machine.  But in a value-centered  explanation of evolution they
are close to the Dynamic process itself,  pulling the pattern of life
forward to greater levels of versatility and  freedom.' (Lila. ch. 11)
Perhaps Protons have a static function which protects more Dynamic  quarks?



[Case]
Tasty jazzy sound from Hackett. I am out there  downloading some more. The
guitar sound is great but at a couple of point  where he played one of
those really long notes, it did sound a bit  sythesized. I did go the the
Fernades site to see what that thing did and it  is pretty cool. Also
looking to give that Brain May solo a second listen. I  have heard "I Want
to Break Free" but never listened to it with the Roland  angle in mind. I
wonder how the idea behind the sustainer applies to what we  are talking
about above. After all what the sustainer is doing is introducing  positive
feedback into the string vibration. In the old days this only  occurred
when the amp volume was loud enough to introduce energy back into  the
string vibration. The result as you know was a feedback loop  that
uncontroled would fry the amp.
 
Mark: I've often thought that in rock music feedback is perhaps  one of the 
most fluid relationships between player and instrument - the  proximity of the 
player to the Amp is a search for a sweet spot? Neil Young's  still at it but 
feedback seems to have gone out of fashion.
Maybe allot of people think it's noise?
The fernandes sustainer maintains a note without going over into feedback,  
and i think there's a diagram on the website showing how it's done. I'm not a  
tech though.
Love,
Mark