[MD] Reductionism

Thu Jul 16 03:54:40 PDT 2009

Could the zero be so dreaded because of the 
computer?  In days of old, dividing by zero would 
cause a computer program to crash, and infinity 
would put it into an never-ending 
loop.  Naaaa.  It must be that zero and infinity are too dynamic.

At 06:08 PM 7/15/2009, you wrote:

>And I believe a zero, or two, is one of the big 
>reasons why the hunt for the Hadron, at Fermilab and soon at CERN.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 02:44 PM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
>
>Sharath, Marsha,
>I've heard it described as a place holder for numerical values
>a whole number representing nothing. which caused a stir
>in Greek philosophy.
>Zero figures heavily in physics and chemistry 
>and denotes a point of beginning.
>infintesimals are addressed in calculus and higher mathematics.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number)
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitesimal
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 2:26:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [MD] Reductionism
>
>
>
>
>Not sure, but zero, along with infinity, does
>seem to be something physicists don't want as an answer in their equations.
>
>
>
>At 02:23 PM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
> >I wonder what really is zero
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:08 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Can't Joe create something like a Plank's Constant for himself, one
> > > guaranteed to get rid of those nasty zeros.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 01:56 PM 7/15/2009, you wrote:
> > >
> > >> Joe,
> > >> Well, division by zero is not so much "physically impossible" as it is
> > >> "in violation of mathematical axioms."
> > >> Division by zero is an operation for which you cannot find an answer,
> > >> so it is disallowed. You can understand why if you think about how
> > >> division and multiplication are related.
> > >>  12 divided by 6 is 2  because
> > >>    6 times 2 is 12
> > >>
> > >>  12 divided by 0 is x  would mean that
> > >>    0 times x = 12
> > >>
> > >> But no value would work for x because 0 
> times any number is 0. So division
> > >> by zero doesn't work.
> > >>
> > >> There's a special word for stuff like this, where you could conceivably
> > >> give
> > >> it any number of values. That word is "indeterminate." It's not the same
> > >> as
> > >> undefined. It essentially means that if it pops up somewhere, you don't
> > >> know
> > >> what its value will be in your case. For instance, if you have the limit
> > >> as x->0
> > >> of x/x and of 7x/x, the expression will have a value of 1 in the first
> > >> case and 7
> > >> in the second case. Indeterminate.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ________________________________
> > >> From: Joseph Maurer <jhmau at sbcglobal.net>
> > >> To: "moq_discuss at moqtalk.org" <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:58:28 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: [MD] Reductionism
> > >>
> > >> Hi Bo,
> > >>
> > >> I will work on the complications.  Thank 
> you! for your encouragement, and
> > >> the Time you have put into MOQ.
> > >>
> > >> Joe
> > >> On 7/13/09 11:14 PM, "skutvik at online.no" <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hello  Joe
> > >> >
> > >> > I've noticed comments from you that includes me, but I have
> > >> > developed some eye problem (when gazing at the screen for a long
> > >> > time some strange patterns start to 
> appear)  I must simply limit myself
> > >> > ...give priority to "saving the MOQ" :-)
> > >> >
> > >> > However, this your input goes to the heart of the matter:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Imho (in my humble opinion), MOQ (Metaphysics Of Quality) reasonably
> > >> >> changed the basis of the logic of SOM (Subject Object Metaphysics).
> > >> >
> > >> > Right you are.
> > >> >
> > >> >> SOM logic defines an undefined subject by the action of a defining
> > >> >> verb.  In the case of dividing by 0 this is illogical. Descartes
> > >> >> states: ³I think therefore I am!²
> > >> >
> > >> > As ZAMM describes it SOM emerged as a result of the Greek
> > >> > philosophical frenzy that brought that culture away from its old
> > >> quality-
> > >> > based (Aretê) reality. Now, with LILA this must be put into a Q-level
> > >> > context and it's plain that SOM is the 
> intellectual level emerging from
> > >> > Aretê as the social level. And only now can Descartes' statement be
> > >> > evaluated and we see that SOM (with him) had reached its final stage,
> > >> > a mental (mind) realm totally removed the material one. After
> > >> > Descartes - with the empiricist - arose the problem which of the two
> > >> > realms is the real (causes the other) and that see-saw that has gone
> > >> > up and down ever since. This quandary was what brought young
> > >> > Phaedrus to despair and triggered his Quality insight that (as you so
> > >> > correctly say) "...changed the basis of the logic of SOM"
> > >> >
> > >> >> The  subject has only intentional 
> existence.  Aristotle defines motion
> > >> >> in a similar way: ³The act of a being 
> in potency in as much as it is in
> > >> >> potency.²  In SOM the subject is undefined (with only intentional
> > >> >> existence from the object) and becomes defined by the action of the
> > >> >> verb and object. E.g., the man is 
> eating.  The ³man² is defined in the
> > >> >> eating, and we can distinguish the ³man² from a statue.
> > >> >
> > >> > This may be correct, but terribly complicated. SOM's problem is that
> > >> > the subject can't exist without the 
> world, and the world not without the
> > >> > subject, i.e. the mind/matter duality is an aggregate and yet SOM's
> > >> > logical base does not allow this so it's plain that a fundamental base
> > >> > shift is needed ... just what the MOQ is and in its light the S/O
> > >> > distinction becomes its STATIC intellectual level. This way the VALUE
> > >> > is retained while the problems dissolve.
> > >> >
> > >> >> In MOQ (Metaphysics of Quality) the subject is defined in an
> > >> >> evolutionary hierarchy.  The object, the level of evolution, is
> > >> >> defined in the action, SOL.
> > >> >
> > >> > At least the above about SOM = the intellectual level is the SOL
> > >> > interpretation.
> > >> >
> > >> > Yours sincerely
> > >> >
> > >> > Bodvar
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
>
>____________
>
>"Compassion diminishes fright about your own 
>pain and increases inner strength." ~His Holiness, the Dalai Lama
>
>
>
>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/

____________

"Compassion diminishes fright about your own pain 
and increases inner strength." ~His Holiness, the Dalai Lama