[MD] Reifying carrots
MarshaV
valkyr at att.net
Sat Sep 18 10:59:36 PDT 2010
Goodie! Goodie! And I didn't even need to bring you a polished apple...
On Sep 18, 2010, at 1:43 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote:
> nice reply.
> i do not own a conquered field of knowledge, but the field of knowlegde is
> asking to be conquered.
> for the little details, wiki shows very little contamination or distortion,
> btw , i worked on a lot of pages
> But i use a pen name; maybe i will tell you all about it sometime, i see a
> lot of improvement in your postings.
>
> I still remember a conversation you made about the bees , the county's
> providing support for bee-keeping and stuff
> still remember i liked it , very native, pure.Stay good Marsha.
>
> i took note of your points.
>
>
> 2010/9/18 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
>
>>
>> Adrie,
>>
>> Please note that the address to the full text for both book reviews and
>> response were available for further research. I was misleading no one.
>>
>>
>> Marsha
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 18, 2010, at 12:51 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>> 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
___
More information about the Moq_Discuss
mailing list