[MD] Equations for Quality

[Alexander Jarnroth]

Hello Mark.

I've been thinking some more about this geometric approach. A vector
approach isn't really much different from any other geometric approach. The
really interesting thing, anyway, is the "orientation" of the "frame".
I mentioned earlier that, instead of ordinary Cartesian frames, you could
pick a "relative" frame at every point, with the origin at that point, the
tangent at the point in the points direction as one axis, and the orthogonal
normal to that tangent as the other axis.
How would this be in a tree dimensional space? Then you would have a tangent
plane and the normal to that plane. Does this sound complicated? Actually it
isn't. Everybody does it every day.
Just to make it clear, imagine that you are in a boat at sea. The earth is a
spherical surface embedded in three dimensional Euclidean space. The
direction, in this case, is the one called "forward". So the first axis is
forward-backward. The other axis is left-right. These two axes span the
horizon which is the tangent plane. Last you have the normal to the plane,
which is spanned by the up-down axis. You can, however, add another kind of
frame in the tangent plane. This frame is the north-south axis and the
east-west axis. Then you have above, zenith and bellow nadir.
This frame also moves together with you, and you yourself are always at the
origin. This concept is an old one, and it's usually called "the tree" in
shamanism.
We mentioned The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy earlier. In the story
there is this planet where the inhabitants have never thought about the
upward direction. They were confined to the two dimensional spherical plane,
they had never thought about the three dimensional Euclidian space embedding
that plane. But one day they did. I guess THAT would be the DQ in this
approach: that is: adding a new dimension.
Even though this could be generalized to non-spatial dimensions, however, it
would just concern the interaction between intellectual SQ and DQ.
Concerning pure physics, and perhaps also biology and sociology, I think
that functions of time (which are called dynamics in mechanics) are more
appropriate.
What would be useful, too, would be a kind of measure of the "readiness for
DQ" in a system - which then would correspond with von Bertalanffy's
"dynamics".
If we equate DQ with negentropy, then we know that there isn't anything,
observable, which could be termed "negentropy". It's rather a kind of state
of a system - and I guess in MOQ, as "state of perception". So you can't
really point to it and say "this is absolute DQ". Rather you can find the DQ
only when it's interaction with some kind of SQ, breaking it down and
creating new SQ which wasn't there before.

/A

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] För 118
Skickat: den 31 oktober 2010 19:37
Till: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Ämne: Re: [MD] Equations for Quality

Hi All,

For those of you interested in math analogies as applied to Quality, I
present the following suggestion.

While Quality has no definition, its expression can be one described though
direction.  Towards betterness.

As such, a vector approach is appropriate.  So I provide the following
beginning:  Dynamic Quality can be seen as a vector of static quality.  This
is formally written as DQ is equal to SQ with a little arrow over the SQ.
 Hard to transcribe with the current font system, but some of you may
understand this.  Further differentiation of the vector is then possible.

Cheers,
Mark
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/md/archives.html