[MD] Step One

Fri Oct 15 16:33:46 PDT 2010

Hi Andrie,

Spoken like a true preacher, yes even preachers can build lasers.  Now, get
out of your pulpit and contemplate.

Yes, light can be described by waves or particles.  The key word is
described.  One can use physics to describe reality in the same way the
bible can describe God.  There is no difference.  If you think that there
is, you are way too deep into Scientism and need to come up for some air.
 So like you can say that is very "zen" of you, I would retort well, that is
very "science" of you.  You can measure light, others can measure
spirituality, it all depends what you use as the ruler.

So physics is a great tool for insight, but nothing more.  If you think you
truly understand things through physics, then perhaps consider what the
basis is for such understanding.  If it is things you have read in books, or
taken classes on, then this is analogous to a seminary education.  Please do
not dismiss other forms of knowledge out of hand.  We are after all talking
about MoQ, which can be enhanced by physics but certainly not proven.  Now,
I am making a lot of assumptions based on your recent posts, which is not
quite right of me.  However, where does Quality come in?

And so, you understand light.  So tell me, at what speed would light
consider itself to be traveling?  Here's a hint: speed equals distance (as
experienced by the traveler) divided by time (as experienced by the
traveler).  You take it from there.

Cheers,

Mark

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:51 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Dave,
> But this is fucking "zen" of you Dave.
>
> i'm aware of the lightcircle experiment, was done for the first time by
> John
> Hedgecoe , a famous English fotographer.
> Hm, the Holographic analogy, strange you mention it in a nerd-context ,
> strange , because the pioneers work from one of your ancestors in relation
> to pumped lasers, was leading to the holographic development.
> I investigated your relative, and indeed, the work he was doeiing was very
> performant and boundary stretching.
>
> The pumped lasers were my field homebase for many years. The interference
> patterns delivered by the pumped lasers
> in an opposite towards eachother pointed gunbarrel setup, created the
> holographic possibilities.
> I can build a ruby or an argonlaser or an yag-laser on my own merits , but
> they originate, Mainmann, Einstein, your ancestor.
> Einstein was the cointosser for Maser/laser, he pointed out towards the
> possibility.
>
> Pumped lasers can make a workaround for the measurementproblem,so a nobel
> for this work was well earned.
>
> Quote DMB
>
> This metaphor breaks down at a certain "point" because that sparkler or
> point of light is not solid thing or entity either.
>
> Well , not in physiks, light is a solid thing, moving ,but generating a
> force, a light on a surface is generating a pressurediffernce
> in opposite to shadow, lesser light , it can be measured , "it" is present
> ,
> light has a weight and a force.It is there.
> This is commonly knowledge in science.
>
> Light cannot dissapear once it is generated, the entropycal nature of the
> universe does not allow it , it can only degrade to heat, warmth, or other
> radiation, energy can never dissapear again.
>
> So , strictly spoken, if you are an independant observer on a planet
> removed
> exactly 58 lightyears away from here
> you will be able to witness the lightflash of "Ivy" the first nuclear
> hydrogen bombexperiment of the Us, done on Eniwetok-atol
> in 1952.
> This is the time light took for itself to travel at lightspeed, 300.000
> km/sec , to reach the observer planet.
> The light is still there, still travelling, and it will appear to be new
> for
> the independant observer, i will deliver force, and look as a new
> expierience, a moment in the present, 58 years old,....
> The relative position of the observer.Strange? no.
>
>
> The jewels.
>
> Yes , they are like the waves.
>
> There is no wave dependant or independant from the previous, all waves are
> dependant and independant at the same moment in time.
> This goes for sound waves, light waves, pressure waves, temperaturewave's ,
> all waves show the same caracter, all waves
> are responding to the uncertainty-principle.
> Is a wave a representation of all other wave's? no and yes at the same
> time,(Heisenberg), there is  no way around this.
> No way, not since Einstein or Heisenberg.
> The old man's last question was about the wave caracter of matter.
> As in matter is energy and energy is matter, only the appearances are
> different(entopical principle)
> E= Mc 2, so it appears to be so that also matter is owning the
> waveformcaracter.
> (*as an aside, this is why i said earlier that quality comes in waves)
>
> (E )covers all energy, all light , all movement , from a droplet of water
> to
> an ocean's wave, the movement of planets
> the movement of us, all movement , every last bit of it.Every universe.
> M2 is mass square, it covers all mass, every rock, every grain of sand,
> within or without the common universe, every leaf, every
> weight , every tree. So ,E and  Mc 2 covers the entire universe in one
> formula and  nothing is excluded.
>
>
> So the function existence of Wiliam James, the proces is true and valid ,
> energy is mass, mass is energy,light is darkness, and darkness is light,
> conciounsness is in-coinciousness, rationality is irrationality, a proces
> is
> a non-proces at the same time.
> Rationality cannot exist without irrationality, etc, expandable without
> limitation.
>
> The squirrels.
>
> I'v had a peach tree for several years, a native one from Turkey, collected
> myself in Selcuk, as a little plant, Selcuk, the cave of seven sleepers,
> Hadrianus his library, the main street to Ephesos, The statue of arete.
>
> We take a little tin can, divide the peaches in two , and fill the can with
> peaches , then add porto of 42 years old, then boil it on the
> BBQ, let the peaches take the porto, allow the alcohol to boil in, the
> result is superb, a native peach tree from Selcuk, Porto of 42 years old,
> boil it in, and eat the peaches, ........this is so very "zen' of me,
> fucking zen, "Zen" with a capital peach letter.
>
> 110 dollar for this bottle porto is not too much, the peaches are heavenly.
> I also have a little vineyard. But that's another story.
>
> loved the squirrel analogy , Dave, thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2010/10/15 david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
>
> >
> >
> > Dan said to Ron:
> > I don't know for sure, but I would say that the selfless existence
> doesn't
> > mean denying the self so much as it means realizing the self doesn't
> exist
> > in light of the Buddha's teachings.
> >
> > dmb says:
> > William James says that consciousness is not a thing or an entity but
> > exists as a function, as a process. Alan Watts uses the image of a point
> of
> > light moving in a circular motion, like a sparkler on the fourth of july.
> In
> > the darkness, a steady motion can make that point look like a full
> circle.
> > To mistake the self as a thing or entity is like taking that point for a
> > circle. This metaphor breaks down at a certain "point" because that
> sparkler
> > or point of light is not solid thing or entity either.
> >
> > And when you start to think of all the things that make consciousness
> > possible - words, tongues, brains, sounds, gravity, food, mothers,
> > evolution, etc, etc, etc forever - the notion that it is some one
> particular
> > "thing" starts to seem pretty absurd. You know, this is what the net of
> > jewels image means. Each jewel reflects all the other jewels and is what
> it
> > is only in relation to all other jewels. Some people (nerds) prefer the
> > holographic analogy. I mean, the idea of co-dependent arising applies to
> the
> > self just as much as any other "thing".
> >
> >
> > Inspired by the recent discussion concerning quality in writing, I wrote
> a
> > poem. It's a meditation on my back yard and it came to me as I had a
> > cigarette there just now. If it had a title it would be something like:
> "NOT
> > very fucking Zen of you, Dave!"
> >
> >
> >
> > a peach tree grows
> > squirrels skitter
> > a garden hose
> > becomes a weapon
> > against hungry little thieves
> >
> >
> > P.S. The peaches were awesome. We had a peach-picking dinner party for
> some
> > friends. I did not invite the squirrels.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>