Jonathan, Ken, Clark, Group;
After reading this I kind of got the feeling that Ken might be trying to put a larger box into a smaller box.
I think it is important to view Dynamic Quality as an open-ended and on-going phenomena. It did not end with the
big-bang, like a watch-maker god. Who having started the clock of the universe ticking withdraws to consider his
creation. Dynamic Quality preconditioned the stable patterns of value that were expressed in the early universe. That
the inflationary period should be considered a "stable" pattern of value might seem strange from our current view point,
but from the point of view of what occurred prior to inflation it doesn't. After the big bang the universe is at least
describable through our current science, prior to the big bang it isn't. Today, inorganic static patterns of value have
had 16 billion years to consolidate their hold on the inorganic level, and it seems highly unlikely that Dynamic Quality
is capable of spontaneously returning the universe to the state of the early universe. I personally don't worry much
about this occurring.
I think Dynamic Quality will continue to attempt to express itself by creating new levels of static quality as it has
done in the past. That we have currently only identified four discrete levels of static patterns in no way precludes
Dynamic Quality from discovering or inventing some new "hyper-intellectual" one. I think it very unlikely that anyone
could predict the lyrics of "Stairway to Heaven", even given perfect (and also theoretically impossible) information
about the velocity and mass of all particles in the big bang and logic. Mathematics, Logic, and System Design are very
useful tools in solving some kinds of problems, but ultimately they are static patterns of intellectual quality, created
in reaction to Dynamic Quality. I find it hard to imagine an open ended system of logic. Logic, even in the most
flexible theoretically form I can imagine, would still need to at least depend on some kind of "identity principle" (
A=A, A<>B, B=B ). One of the weirdest (and best) ideas in MOQ is the idea that Dynamic Quality seeks freedom from
I sometimes wonder whether the reality that existed prior to the big bang, was never really eliminated, but was instead
was forced into the Quantum level. We know that at the Quantum level a strange "randomness" or "uncertainity" comes
into play, or to look at it another way perhaps this "uncertainty" is really just a basic tendency to resist any static
pattern. The half life for some radioactive isotope should be 10 days, but it could decay in 10 minutes or 10 months.
It decay time cannot be predicted for individuals atom only for large groups.
Hmmm... What do you think? Sound reasonable?
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:email@example.com
unsubscribe - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:33 BST