Re: MF Time: fixed vs. unfixed

From: Jaap Karssenberg (j.g.karssenberg@student.utwente.nl)
Date: Wed Jun 20 2001 - 14:30:43 BST


bo, marco and focii,

to bo:
I have nothing but the deepest respect for your analysis of my use of the
word 'just'. The problem is that folowing the MOQ almost anything is
'created' by the observing mind, but I refuse to conclude that anything thus
finds his place on the intellectuel level - why should the MOQ then need at
the other three for ? ZAMM says Newton created gravity by defining it, I
would say that what makes Newton one of the great scientists is, that he
created a new pattern on(/in) the anorganic level ! Dynamical influence
flows from the intellectual to the inorganic level.

(one of the road question
> Struan slighted me
> by saying (something to the effect of) ..if the MoQ relieved me from
> any existential "angst" I was welcome to it! OK, that was a good
> description.
Is the word "angst" the internationaly used term in existentialism ? Because
in my dutch translations "angst" reads as the dutch word for "fear" and so
is not a special term.)

Should there be a new concept of language and communication in order to
avoid SOM in the discussing of MOQ ?

marco wrote:
> So, Jaap, I offer my answers to your points:
> > Time is an orderning inflicted by the inorganic level.
> Time is the measure of changing.
The changing is thus ordered - why should changing submit itself to a 'one
way stream' of time?

> > There are no direct problems with time as long as we take enough
particles
> to use statistics.
> I think the twins paradox is a problem with time, even if each twin is
composed of enough particles.
Which problem ? The system does in no way violate the idea of time, nor the
ordening. The "paradox" isn't even a real paradox (it *is* logically
consistent), it only violates a outdated "common sense".

> > There could be a indirect conflict between time/entropy and evolution -
but
> this is a problem of defining order and chaos.
> The real conflict is between entropy and evolution. I think Jonathan has a
lot to say about it.
You only reverse my statement: I just stated that the (time/)entropy vs.
evolution conflict is based on the understanding of order and chaos.

greetings, Jaap

------- End of forwarded message -------

MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:31 BST