[MD] Chance v. Dynamic Quality

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Andre]
I agree with you Arlo, and as said above, hopefully we have learned 
some more from this and other tragedies.

[Arlo]
The human spirit is resilient, even if at times needing a spark from 
tragedy to act. But I'll fall back on the word "chance" (and 
"probability") here and say that you can never hit a point where 
there is no probability for "failure". Each and every flight around 
the world has, even if its so small as to be almost insignificant, 
some probability for crashing. The "chance" is always there. And that 
"chance" derives from the complex conflicts between inorganic, 
biological, social and intellectual patterns all responding to DQ 
within their own repertoire.

I've been watching that show "Seconds from Disaster", which I find 
very well done. I think watching it with a MOQ eye shows how small 
events (almost inconsequential at the time the occur) can very 
quickly cause high probabilities for "disaster" when they overlap 
with other small events. It's an almost exponential increase in 
probability for tragedy, like when a few small waves "sync" and cause 
one huge destructive wave. What's important (I feel) to see is that 
each "event" opens up a new probability field, changes the "odds" of 
certain things occurring. But these fields are more than just simply 
"additive".

You mention the recent Turkish Airlines crash, and I see now where 
the "cause" of this is being attributed to a faulty altitude 
indicator and "inattentive pilots". Let's say each one of these set 
up a probability-to-crash field of 1%. Together, however, the field 
increases to, let's say, 50%. At any point along the way there was 
never certainty of "crash" or "not crash", but a string of events got 
the probability so high it seems (in retrospect) unavoidable. Maybe a 
gust of wind at the last moment may have angled the plane to impact 
differently, and instead of nine death there would have been none. Or 
maybe more. Maybe a passing storm would've grounded the jet long 
enough for someone to catch the faulty equipment. Maybe if the pilot 
had (I'm just wildly speculating here) gone to bed an hour earlier 
the night before, or had one more cup of coffee that morning, or 
maybe would have been sleeping better if he had not had a fight with 
his spouse the week before (or something social like this), maybe if 
a politician or CEO somewhere would've demanded better training 
and/or regulation, maybe all these things would've changed the 
outcome; maybe for the better, maybe for the worse.

Point is, in that moment of the crash, the probability of it 
occurring approached 100%. However, a week, or a month or a year, 
before hand the odds of ALL these things coming together exactly as 
they did approaches the most insignificant percentage possible (or 
consider the odds of all these things coming together as they did one 
hundred years ago!), say .0000000000000000000001% or less. Just 
think, if that pilots great, great grandfather had been killed before 
birthing that particular family line, maybe this event would not have 
occurred.

This is the point about "chance", there is "probability" something 
will occur (which increases vastly as one approaches the dynamic 
moment.. example, the chance of me pressing "t" after typing "momen" 
are about as near 100% as you can get. But the chance a few years 
back that I'd be pressing the "t" key in just that second were as 
close to 0% as you could get), but never any predestined "plan".

I know you know this. Like I said, this is an interesting topic for me.

[Andre]
PS did you enjoy that ride on the Harley?

[Arlo]
You know it! Although in central Pennsylvania we can always count on 
some April snow. Each Spring I treat myself to a new "custom" 
upgrade. This year I am going simple and swapping the old saddle for 
a Mustang solo seat (with a removable pillion). I am also hoping to 
produce some web video this year of our run to the Vietnam Memorial 
(as well as some other rides we take). If I do, I'll post a link. 
Nothing in the world like hundreds of bikes moving in solemn 
procession, and nothing more moving than honoring those who have made 
the greatest sacrifice; when you see some of the biggest, burliest, 
toughest, meanest looking bikers reduced to uncontrollable tears, you 
see a glimpse of the most profound human condition there is.













>Andre:
>And they did, and hopefully, the intellectual patterns investigating this
>tragedy have learnt some more about the behaviour of organic/inorganic PoV's
>(in the said circumstances/context) to minimise the chances of a repeat.
>
>Arlo:
>When that failed, and the atoms and whatnot composing the rocket were
>"freed" from their prison, they responded to DQ in a way that caused a
>conflict between them and the intellectual-social-biological components, and
>the inorganic components won.
>Anyway, that's my take on it.
>
>Andre:
>I agree with you Arlo, and as said above, hopefully we have learned some
>more from this and other tragedies.
>As you are no doubt aware, we have had one a few weeks ago here in Amsterdam
>with Turkish Airlines. Preliminary investigation points to mechanical and
>human 'faillure'. These indications simply point to the ever present need to
>remain dynamically active in our search for improvements,... realising these
>will be provisional.
>
>Regards,
>Andre
>PS did you enjoy that ride on the Harley?
>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/