[MD] Reifying carrots

Sat Sep 18 09:51:09 PDT 2010

so what i meant to say , marsha, is that your article lead is leading people
to things like this
We really need to stay in tune with all off this material , Marsha, i really
think we need to pay attention.
If whe start stepping over details, we have no case, we cannot go to the
forrest if there are no trees.

Quote ANT PIRSIG,
Ant:
Yes, I think it is, though I’m not too sure about the “illusion” part;
“appearance” might be a better word. Anyway (in the context of the
SODV paper), this is what Pirsig wrote to me about space:
“I have thought about Bell’s theorem and what it might mean for
the MOQ and so far have concluded that this theorem is just more of
the same subject/object mess. ‘Local’ and ‘non-local’ presume a
physical space. Physical space is a subjective intellectual pattern,
which is presumed to correspond to an objective inorganic pattern.
These patterns are so entrenched they are some of the last to disappear
during the enlightenment process, but before pure Dynamic Quality is
understood they must go. The ‘nothingness’ of Buddhism has nothing
to do with the ‘nothingness’ of physical space. That’s one of the
advantages in calling it ‘Quality’ instead of ‘nothingness.’ It reduces
the confusion.” (Letter to Ant, June 1st 1996)

shit , i forgot to EXALT it a little bit

2010/9/18 ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>

> EMPHASED!!
>
> 2010/9/18 ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>
>
> "Exalt , well , no, i emhased it virtually to show the point that article's
>> like this contain
>> falsifications 'an sich' embedded or by association with occult science.
>>
>> -concider it or don't, well, leads like this are taking other people
>> towards the article without pointing out
>> towards the conflicting matters. probably you were not aware of this , and
>> probably people following the lead
>> are not , but leaving a part out of its contexts in this way is dangerous
>> and arose my suspicion.
>>
>> And of course , no , i am not a physician, i never said i was , i work in
>> a car factory,with my  hands.
>> But i'm better than a shitload of them.I was studying all the books you
>> see, and i think its a good idea
>> for you to do so, this is encouraging.
>> Its not a very good idea to jump over the material.
>>
>> Like the Bell's theoreme,one has to be aware of all this kind of
>> contamination.
>>
>> Greetz, the log lady, Burps!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/9/18 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>>
>>>
>>> Adrie,
>>>
>>>
>>> I've posted a lot of stuff.  Consider it or don't.  Maybe the book
>>> will arrive today, and I will have more to post.
>>>
>>> By the way, are you a physicist?   And why you exalt what
>>> you point out?   I don't.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 18, 2010, at 11:13 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote:
>>>
>>> > But you forgot the rest of the article Marsha
>>> >
>>> > I isolated a part from the article further on as i am very good in
>>> Nonlocal
>>> > &local reality's.
>>> >
>>> > comment on isolated part
>>> >
>>> > Their treatment of two-slit interference ranks right up there with (but
>>> > differs interestingly from) Feynman’s famous “comes in lumps” approach,
>>> and
>>> > their nontechnical description of Bell’s theorem is one of the best
>>> I’ve
>>> > seen, and by far the least mathematical.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 3 problems
>>> > trying to ridicule Feynman is not a very good idea, this is adressed at
>>> the
>>> > autor.
>>> >
>>> > The Bell theorem.
>>> > The theorem is specifically rejected by most of the scientifical
>>> > world,because its a limp home formula.
>>> > it is under controverse since it was stated.Its rubbish.
>>> >
>>> > MR PIRSIG, specifically rejects the theoreme, in one of his annotations
>>> on
>>> > LILA'S CHILD,in a earlier stage of history.
>>> > He recognised very early that it was crap, and i happen to agree with
>>> him
>>> > and 99% of science.
>>> > PIRSIG rejects it for a reason, this is very easy to find back.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Nb, i was already pointing out in a conversation with Mr Buchanan, some
>>> time
>>> > ago, that PIRSIG rejects the theoreme
>>> >      It is still to be found back in the archives, or in the
>>> annotations
>>> > made upon LILA.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > this is only 1 leech to kill, there are more in the article...
>>> > sincerely yours , Pontius PILATUS, landlord of judea, the man on the
>>> > mountain.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2010/9/18 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> from American Journal of Physics Review of Quantum Enigma:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Take space-time, for example. We organize our perceptions into events,
>>> and
>>> >> for many purposes it is illuminating to represent those events as
>>> points in
>>> >> an abstract four-dimensional continuum. This is so useful that most of
>>> us
>>> >> reify this abstract scheme, believing that we inhabit a world that is
>>> such a
>>> >> four- (or, for a few of us, ten-) dimensional continuum. The
>>> reification of
>>> >> abstract time and space goes so far back in human history that it’s
>>> easy to
>>> >> miss the intellectual sleight of hand. The reification of electric and
>>> >> magnetic fields is more recent but also came to be taken for granted,
>>> until
>>> >> it started to unravel (for some of us) with the arrival of quantum
>>> >> electrodynamics. The strongest hints of how we have been fooling
>>> ourselves
>>> >> emerge when we try to reify quantum states, and thereby run into “the
>>> >> measurement problem” and “quantum nonlocality.”
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> http://quantumenigma.com/reviews-our-responses/
>>> >>
>>> >> ___
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> parser
>

-- 
parser