[MD] What's missing

[skutvik at online.no]

Khaled

On 26 Mar. you wrote:
 
> Bo, Laird and others
 
> Here is an observation that I have thrown in before but got nowhere.
 
> One of the things we keep going around here is that we need a new way
> of looking and relating to things. Assuming the language issue is
> agreed on.
 
> Until calculus came along, most of our arithmetic was able to deal
> with numbers, shapes, geometry, buildings, interest rates and so on.
> Then one day when we could not figure out the rate of change, a new
> method was needed, hence the birth of calculus. The way I see it is
> that we are stuck in a flat plane two dimensional realm, trying to
> understand a 3 dimensional abject. What is lacking is a way to relate
> SOM to the environment in which it resides.

The calculus I understand was what solved - or dissolved - the 
famous paradoxes of the Antique physics and I see the MOQ as 
a latter-day "calculus" that dissolves the paradoxes of SOM if that 
is what you are saying?  

> We use terms like cultural clashes, a clash of civilizations. What
> works for some one, may not work for others.
 
> There is a show on TV that follows the lives of 5 married women from a
> very affluent are in Los Angeles. All they do is "do lunch" and shop.
> They could care less if they vote or what the minimum wage is. And
> they love to get chauffeured around. ( tongue in Cheek here) In a way
> their lives are no different than that of a typical well to do Saudi
> Arabian Woman.

TV shows are our age's "fairy tales". To watch the affluent people 
and their "soap" affairs is something the not so affluent and not 
so adventurous love to do. To make the TV figures talk about  
minimum wages and/or metaphysics would not sell.  
 
> Back to our subject. We keep trying to figure it out, whatever IT is,
> meanwhile the time and space continuum is moving along. By the time we
> get an answer, it is no longer valid.

A deep one this, but I'm not sure what your point is.

> It's like trying to pass a minimum wage bill, by the time the bill
> passes, the wage has lost 10% of its value from when it got
> introduced.

> I do not know what the answer is, but what I know is that it has to be
> dynamic, as it relates to reality. For example when instituting a
> minimum wage, we can say it has to be 1/6th per annum of what the
> highest paid senator gets. 

And the metaphysical implications are ;-)? 

Bo