[MD] Ironistic Metaphysics

[Ian Glendinning]

Bo, you sir, are the master of misinformation and a hack. Simply
muck-spreading a meme.

That "surprising fact" about travelling at different speeds leading to
different relative time is a myth however many wiki pages and popular
science books say otherwise. It would be plain paradoxical if it were
true.

It's the absolute acceleration not the relative velocity, that
determines which of the relatively moving observers record slower or
faster time, distance and ordering of events. Relatively they are
always both moving at the same velocity relative to each other.

Even wikipedia gets this right if you look at the right pages between
the right edits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox

The weirdness is that there does in fact appear to be an inertial
frame of reference for the absolute acceleration "at a given location
in a so-called expanding universe". But of course science largely
chooses to ignore this inconvenience when applying for billion dollar
funding post-Copenhagen. Come back Einstein.

Regards
Ian

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:53 PM, X Acto<xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> Bo:
> The MOQ is a meta-metaphysics compared to the Aristotelian-
> Academical term, but as I try to convey, it robs SOM of its "M" rank
> and thereby degrades it to a sub-set of its own. Some people show
> their inability to pull themselves by hair or bootstraps out of SOM by
> not seeing this "transformation". To move from Newton physics to
> Einstein's needs a set of equations called Lorenz Transformation, the
> SOL is such a procedure from SOM to MOQ.
>
> Ron:
>
> The Lorenz transformation has nothing to do with transforming
> calculations from newtonian to relativity.
>
> "In physics, the Lorentz transformation precisely describes how,
> according to the theory of special relativity, two observers'
> varying measurements of space and time can be converted into
> each other's frame of reference. It reflects the surprising
> fact that observers moving at different velocities report
> different distances, passage of time, and in some cases even
> different orderings of events. The Lorentz transformation was
> the result of attempts by the eponymous Hendrik Lorentz and
> others to explain observed properties of light propagating in
> what was presumed to be the luminiferous aether; Albert Einstein
> later reinterpreted the transformation as a statement about
> the nature of space and time themselves and derived it from
> the axioms of relativity.
> -wiki
>
> You sir, are the master of misinformation and a hack.
>
> The SOL procedure, as far as I have been able get from you,
> it a semantic one of stripping the "M" from SOM and adding it
> to "M"OQ. quite a complicated procedure Bo, what mathematical
> formula did you use?
>
> For you, using the gallery metaphor, MoQ is the only painting in the gallery
> a bigger one than the previouse painting that was the only painting in the gallery
> which now hangs as a detail might hang on the larger painting of the MoQ.
> Bo's MoQ. Yay Bo.
>
> But the MoQ I subscribe to. the one that Pirsig presents really isn't a painting at all
> but the ability to recognize and value other paintings, it's the knowledge that there is no
> one "real" "true" painting that they are all true in their own context and their value
> is relative to my own context.
>
> This creates a "radical metaphysic"
>
> Bo's "Meta-Metaphysic" is culturalcentric, limited and falls to the same absolutism that SOM does.
> It produces ideas of western cultural superiority.
>
> He produces no support for his assertions other than his rather limited reading of Pirsigs work
> and a handfull of vastly misunderstood theories and terms. But he seems to have learned
> a very important aspect of "truthiness" that hammering on a single statement long enough
> will give it creedance and an illusion of verifyablity and acceptance. Where, in P.T. Barnum
> style, the illusion of self importance and granduer go's miles in selling snake oil, the aire
> of acerdimic authority is more persuasive than actually knowing what the hell one is talking about.
>
>
> but we love our Bo just the same
>
>
> and his struggle with SOM's testicals
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>