[MD] LC: Expanded Annotation 57

[John Carl]

>
>
> In the MOQ, matter arises from experience, not the other way around. Time
> arises from experience as well, so it arises independently of matter.
>
> I am unsure what you mean when you say: So we just toss E=mc2 out the
> window? Equations do not arise from matter. They are ideas. They arise from
> experience independently of matter.
>

Hi Dan,

I wasn't talking about the equation "as" an equation, I was talking about
what the equation represents - the relativity of time and space.

There is a problem still, but not a big problem.  The problem is that we
properly (if we want to be proper about it) speak of
"the space-time continuum" when we talk about this cosmic stuff because we
have evolved intellectually to the point where we understand this
relativity.  Matter is pretty much the same as space, as far as I can see.
 Matter is composed of space and space is composed of matter.  And time is
related to both.

So I would disagree with bob if he said that time was independent of matter.
 And I would disagree with him if he said that time precedes matter, but I
think he said "probably" and you can't really disagree with an equivocation
so I'll just state for the record that I think the _best_ metaphysical
outlook is that the relativistic space-matter/time continuum arises from
experience, with no preference or precedence for either since they arise
together always.

Although, it's a bit tautological since what is experience but the
experience of the relativistic space-matter/time continuum? which if you
didn't go any deeper than that you'd have problems, like Ham evidently does,
dealing with this as a solid metaphysical foundation.

However as I see it, the solid metaphysical foundation upon which the MoQ
rests is that Quality is  demonstrably real and outside of or beyond the
context of either the experience-er or the experienc-ed.  Once you got that,
the rest is just singing and dancing.

And some song and dance is better than others.