[MD] The Grand Design

Sun Oct 17 23:18:18 PDT 2010

Hi Andrie,

Perhaps I am feeling a bit remorseful for my latest posts.  You seem like a
nice guy who deserves an explanation for my somewhat provocative statements.
 They are all done with some thought and, while seeming spurious, are quite
honest.

For what it is worth (not much), I have been a practicing scientist for over
30 years now.  I joyfully make my living as one and hop from job to job to
things that interest me and that I can contribute to.  I have been working
in the fields of cancer lately.   If you dig on the internet (and I wouldn't
bother) my resume can be found online, open to the public.  Previously I
used to post from my aol address which contained my name.  The mailbox got
so cluttered that I switched to this commercial gmail under the pseudonym
118 (which is by the way the highest molecular weight achieved so far).

My opinions have been formed over the years through constant questioning and
certain life events that I do not care to repeat.  As a rebel, I do not like
anybody being put on some kind of pedestal.  I consider all modes of thought
to be valid, and the shock tactics I use are pretty limp.  I am tuned into
the perceptions of others in the forum as they express themselves.

My interests in MOQ stem from the '70s when I read ZMM.  The book was
certainly enlightening, and, with other books of the time, provided a path.
 I have a vested interest in seeing MOQ become much more.

So, please do not take my comments to heart (no, I'm sure you do not).  I am
not trying to get respect (or maybe I am), but clear the field.  OK, enough
of this mamby pamby stuff, let's get back to the work at hand.

Cheers,
Mark

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:01 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>wrote:

> I am not your enemy , Mark, and the distortion was wrong, because it is
> wrong to set off on something that is not correct
> from the beginning, better to tell you now.
>
> The expression on his face is called a sardonic laughter, induced by his
> disease, its the laugh of someone with a tetanosinfection.
> Pff, disproval of god, well, i think Hawking mentioned something like, "in
> my calculations there is no place for a creator".
> This is his opinion, not mine.
> If you have a problem with that, write him a letter, i do not handle his
> helpdesk.
>
> I think the only lecture you went to with Hawking, are these on youtube.
> Stay consistent if you like further interaction, Mark.
>
> 2010/10/17 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>
>
> > OK, so I am being accused of distortion.  Fine.  It's good to have an
> > enemy.
> >
> > If what you guys are suggesting is an attitude of humility and reverence,
> > then I must add that I have been to lectures presented by Hawkins.  I can
> > tell you that the expression on his face is one of arrogance and
> disdain...
> >
> > There was in interview with the coauthor a few weeks ago on NPR or some
> > affiliate.  There is no suggestion of humility there either.  My way or
> the
> > highway.  In fact the suggestion was of the disproval of God.  Now
> Andrie,
> > from reading the book, would you say this is correct?
> >
> > All in good fun,
> > Mark
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Nope, John, its not a carefull searching out , or sorting out, i did
> read
> > > the grand design, and he was conflicting the context.
> > >
> > > "We shall attempt", is correct. And Hawking will be the last to say
> that
> > it
> > > is all figured out, "we shall attempt."
> > >
> > > Its useless to work with distorted material, John, there is no point in
> > it.
> > > Been reading back some archives, Mauritius caught my attention, you
> > tossed
> > > it, as an aside.
> > > No , i don't think so, i don't need to catch you or Mark, i travelled
> the
> > > opposite island of Mauritius many times, Reunion, isle de la
> > > reunion,..I always went to a place called Manapany-Les -Bains, if you
> > want
> > > to google it,very nice place to do big game fishing.
> > >
> > > So from there i went to Mauritius many times, so if you like points of
> > > congruence to talk about , they are there, even in this , even in the
> > > answer
> > > you gave to me about
> > > the value's of the bible or the answer you gave on 7th day
> adventism-,it
> > is
> > > not because i do not comment on something that i do not think about it,
> > > mind
> > > this , i did not in any way act to ridiculise your answers.Or to
> distort
> > > them as given.
> > >
> > > So there is no catch to do, no nice catch,..i was reading the
> interaction
> > > Dan, John, to use some of your words, if you allow me
> > > Their  highway, my lowway, etc,   ..this is my proposal, "the road
> ahead
> > of
> > > us", our road , the solid road.
> > > As a consideration, merely.
> > >
> > > Greetz, Adrie, the devils own
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2010/10/17 John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > Nice catch Adrie,
> > > >
> > > > Because I was about to go all ballastic on the fact that "42" is a
> > > superior
> > > > answer to the grand design, simply because it means we haven't got
> the
> > > > cosmos figured out and the only answer is the continual seeking.
> > > >
> > > > But your careful searching out "we shall attempt" blows that one out
> of
> > > the
> > > > water.  Good for you.  (And Dr. Hawking)
> > > >
> > > > Reverend John
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 7:32 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <
> parser666 at gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >  As we promise in our opening chapter, unlike the
> > > > > answer to the Ultimate Question of Life given in the *Hitchhiker’s
> > > Guide
> > > > to
> > > > > the Galaxy*, the answer we provide in *The Grand Design* is not,
> > > simply,
> > > > > "42."
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Compared carefully with the original line, it is not simply a work
> of
> > > > > cut/copy paste, it is re-engineered
> > > > > serving the purpose of distorting the original sentence.
> > > > > Things are left out and the context/content is distorted.
> > > > > Even if it is done on a purpose,...then You , Mark ,are not capable
> > of
> > > > > this,this is in the backgroundscenery of the postinglist-handed
> over
> > > > > realtered material. Re-editing like this is not acceptable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Quote Hawking-(literally), the grand design.
> > > > > "This is the ultimate question of life, the universe and
> everything.
> > > > > We shall attempt to answer it in this book.
> > > > > Unlike the answer given in the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy,
> ours
> > > > won't
> > > > > be simply '42'", end quote.
> > > > >
> > > > > He wrote , " we shall attempt", not the answer we provide.
> > > > >
> > > > > Coherence , Mark, coherence.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2010/10/17 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey John,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Looks like the answer is not 42.  This coming from the Grand
> Wizard
> > > > > > himself,
> > > > > > see below.  Sorry to burst your bubble.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mark
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Editorial Reviews
> > > > > > Amazon.com Review
> > > > > > Stephen Hawking on The Grand Design
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How can we understand the world in which we find ourselves? Over
> > > twenty
> > > > > > years ago I wrote *A Brief History of Time*, to try to explain
> > where
> > > > the
> > > > > > universe came from, and where it is going. But that book left
> some
> > > > > > important
> > > > > > questions unanswered. Why is there a universe--why is there
> > something
> > > > > > rather
> > > > > > than nothing? Why do we exist? Why are the laws of nature what
> they
> > > > are?
> > > > > > Did
> > > > > > the universe need a designer and creator?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It was Einstein’s dream to discover the grand design of the
> > universe,
> > > a
> > > > > > single theory that explains everything. However, physicists in
> > > > Einstein’s
> > > > > > day hadn’t made enough progress in understanding the forces of
> > nature
> > > > for
> > > > > > that to be a realistic goal. And by the time I had begun writing
> *A
> > > > Brief
> > > > > > History of Time*, there were still several key advances that had
> > not
> > > > yet
> > > > > > been made that would prevent us from fulfilling Einstein’s dream.
> > But
> > > > in
> > > > > > recent years the development of M-theory, the top-down approach
> to
> > > > > > cosmology, and new observations such as those made by satellites
> > like
> > > > > > NASA’s
> > > > > > COBE and WMAP, have brought us closer than ever to that single
> > > theory,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > to being able to answer those deepest of questions. And so
> Leonard
> > > > > Mlodinow
> > > > > > and I set out to write a sequel to *A Brief History of Time* to
> > > attempt
> > > > > to
> > > > > > answer the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and
> Everything.
> > > The
> > > > > > result is *The Grand Design*, the product of our four-year
> effort.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In *The Grand Design* we explain why, according to quantum
> theory,
> > > the
> > > > > > cosmos does not have just a single existence, or history, but
> > rather
> > > > that
> > > > > > every possible history of the universe exists simultaneously. We
> > > > question
> > > > > > the conventional concept of reality, posing instead a
> > > "model-dependent"
> > > > > > theory of reality. We discuss how the laws of our particular
> > universe
> > > > are
> > > > > > extraordinarily finely tuned so as to allow for our existence,
> and
> > > show
> > > > > why
> > > > > > quantum theory predicts the multiverse--the idea that ours is
> just
> > > one
> > > > of
> > > > > > many universes that appeared spontaneously out of nothing, each
> > with
> > > > > > different laws of nature. And we assess M-Theory, an explanation
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > laws
> > > > > > governing the multiverse, and the *only* viable candidate for a
> > > > complete
> > > > > > "theory of everything." As we promise in our opening chapter,
> > unlike
> > > > the
> > > > > > answer to the Ultimate Question of Life given in the
> *Hitchhiker’s
> > > > Guide
> > > > > to
> > > > > > the Galaxy*, the answer we provide in *The Grand Design* is not,
> > > > simply,
> > > > > > "42."
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > 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
> > >
> > 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
>