[MD] Betterness - 4 levels of!

[118]

Hi Tim,
Some comments below to pass the time
Mark


> [Tim]
> I am thinking that we must start even further back than equations.
> Where does the idea of 'equation' fall out of metaphysics?  Does it?
>
[Mark]
Well, I don't know.  I have been studying the applications of math to
language as is used by the Qabalah.  To me it seems like the random
generation of associated words, but they are pretty smart, so it must be
more than that.

>
>
> [Tim]
> I understand the hesitancy, but I think if we 'follow our noses' we
> might ...  For my part, I think the first thing for me is that quality
> cannot be 'simple'.
>
[Mark]
No, and neither is physics.

>
>  [Tim]
> Just to reiterate, my sense says, stay perfectly true to our
> metaphysical capacities.  I have yet to see a maths fall out of the MoQ
> either.  If our efforts lead us to something solid on the other side,
> that will be the fruit, that will be a check on our work, it will be
> that, in fact, which tells teh 'objective side' what is worth keeping
> from their camp.  But I don't want to take what they have already
> produced, because everything they have is got by starting in the middle
> (this too is from R.P. Feynman: I can't produce it exactly, the idea
> isn't new, but I remember peeking through his lectures on physics, and
> there, somewhere pretty early on - but in the middle - is a chapter on
> simple math.  Remember, he was lecturing to top notch college students.
> Anyway, that chapter looked to build up to something about logarithms
> maybe, it has been a while, but the thing that stuck out for me - and
> made me wonder if this was his point in talking about simple math to
> such adept students - he talked about his perspective on teh foundations
> of math: even mere arithmetic, the idea of 1 and 0, is 'starting in the
> middle'.)  Anyway, I think it this difficulty of where to start,
> non-dimensional points, strings, etc. that keeps physics beyond the
> 'veil'.  Metaphysics is about poking around on the other side, but can
> we grab hold of anything while we are there?
>

[Mark]
I am glad you brought up Feynman.  He had very simple ways for describing
complex physical concepts.  By doing so, he was also able to advance much of
physics.  Using him as emulation would be gratifying indeed.

>
>
> [Tim]
> I just did the google search and the first thing that came up was:
> http://quanta-gaia.org/dobson/EquationsOfMaya.html
> this is what it says first:
> "Modern cosmologists usually take non-existence for granted and hope to
> get the Universe out of nothing. But must we assume that in the absence
> of the Universe and in the absence of space and time there would be
> nothing? Or can we, without so rash an assumption, find clues to what
> might remain if instead we take existence for granted but leave out
> space and time? Could what remains, through apparition or maya, appear
> as this Universe? Can we, from what remains, get a Universe of gravity,
> electricity and inertia?"
>
> I guess I'm not the only crackpot behind the veil!
>

[Mark]
No, there has been much attempt at rectifying science and some spiritual
concepts.  I suppose science eventually leads there.  So, there are lots of
crackpots.  Maybe some are more cracked than others, but who am I to say.

>
>
> > [Mark before]
> > I guess it depends on what you are expecting from our knowledge.
> > Knowledge
> > is a creation of man.
>
> [Tim]
> How sure are you?
>

[Mark]
It is just an assumption that I use.  I really have no idea how real it is.

>
>
> [Tim]
> if we are to try to start from math, again, perhaps that is to destroy.
> But we have all been discussing, quite precisely, though with no settled
> bullseye, and I don't think that any of us thinks that we have
> destroyed.  Again, I am suggesting sticking to OUR guns, see if anything
> structured falls out.
>
> [Mark]
>
OK, here is where I started:  Quality is everything.  For the sake of
description it can be broken down into dynamic and static quality.  How
these two interact was what I asked the group.

> --
>
> 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
>