[MD] reality

[118]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 1:29 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> A droplet of water contains more information than a non-droplet of water
> A collection of sandgrains on the beach contains more information than a
> non-collection of sandgrains on the beach.
>

Hi Adrie,
Are you substituting information for matter?  If that is the case, then I
would agree with you from a materialistic point of view.  It is difficult
when terms are substituted. Would you then say that Quality is information?
 Perhaps you have already said this, I forget.  I would say that Quality
creates information.

>
> [Adrie]

Regardless of the observer/observed,-it is possible to leave the
> observermodel
> out of the picture, if you work this out on a sheet of paper, because you
> keep the relative position as observer, not the absolute(the absolute
> requires to observe
> physikally), the relative position not.
>
> Now you can avoid this difficulty, you, Mark , defined yourself as the only
> observer in the above stated, but you forgot all other observers, and you
> did not define your properties to observe, your variable's, your tools.
>
> We are on very thin ice now, ..we are trespassing on a physikal world with
> metaphysikal branches.
>

[Mark]
I believe you are trespassing into the metaphysical world with the physical
world, not the other way around.  We define the physical world with
metaphysics.  This is the difference between a materialistic viewpoint and
one of Quality.  If the physical world is True to you, then you need to
change your perspective to one of MOQ.  This is the first step.  After that,
everything is different.

>
> [Adrie]

starting from the relative model, the sheet of paper, ask yourself this,
> without
> observing it,..
>
> will the informationcontainer(the number of sandgrains ) ever be the same
> again
> after only 1 grain of sand is moved in the model,keep in mind that this
> moving
> will change the total configuration,the position of all other grains,
> without moving them. the configuration can never be the same again.
> Even if you succeed to re-place the graind,..it became older,containing
> more
> information.
>

[Mark]
Well, this is an interesting metaphysical question.  If a tree falls, does
it have a sound if nobody is around to hear it?  Are you talking about the
butterfly effect with this?  Do we speak of things that do not contain
information?  Can you separate that which has and doesn't have information.
 Is information opposed to something else?  Are you bringing in the
phenomenon of time into your metaphysical observation?  I am not sure what
you are using as your ground for reference.  Please explain.

>
> [Adrie]

Also keep in mind that nothing is observed.
> There was no observer defined/present
>
> Can you tell me the endconclusion? its not an equasion or something.
> It should be clear.
>

[Mark]
Yes it is clear, you are speaking of the physical world, not the
metaphysical one.  Which do you think comes first?  Perhaps we are all
something else's thoughts.  Can you go there, or are you still stuck in the
physical world?  This is where Phaedrus was before coming up with Quality.
 Can you see a world in a grain of sand, and a heaven in a wildflower, hold
infinity in the palm of your hand, and eternity in an hour?

Think about it.

Mark

>
>
> parser
> 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
>