LS Re: The Principle of Quality

Doug Renselle (renselle@on-net.net)
Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:04:10 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Next message: Magnus Berg: "LS Re: Principles - Update"
Previous message: Samuel Palmer: "LS Re: Pursuit"

Ant McWatt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:50:55 +0000 Bodvar Skutvik
>
> > Hello Anthony McWatt are you listening in?. I have a vague
> > recollection that the question of a "goal" for existence was
> > answered by Robert Pirsig in a letter to you. That he said that he
> > had been confronted with the seeming paradox that Dynamic Quality
> was
> > both the source and the goal, but I am not able to remember what his
> > conclusion was, nor am I able to find the actual letter. Could you
> > please look into your files and see if there is something resembling
> > this?
> > Thanks.
> > Bo
> >
> Hello Bo,
>
> That Quote for you!
>
> "Hunting for weaknesses..." (in your paper) "I find that on
> page one, paragraph four, there is a sentence,
> 'Fundamentally Pirsig`s term is a MYSTIC one, and refers to
> the undifferentiated, indeterminate, reality from which the
> universe has evolved (or grown) from.' Although this is
> true at a Buddha`s level of understanding, it would be
> confusing and illogical in the world of everyday affairs to
> say that the world is evolving both from and toward the
> same thing. I have had some reader mail that has pointed
> out at one place I seem to imply that Quality and chaos are
> the same and at another that they are different, so I
> haven`t been clear on this myself and have left an opening
> to attack. To close it up, let us say that the universe is
> evolving from a condition of low quality (quantum forces
> only, no atoms, pre-big bang) toward a higher one (birds,
> trees, societies and thoughts) and that in a static sense
> (world of everyday affairs) these two are not the same."
>
> (letter from Robert Pirsig, March 29, 1997, the word
> "MYSTIC" originally in bold not capitals)
>
> Well, I hope that is some help.
>
Anthony,

A really good book on the material Pirsig shared with you above is a
text I previously suggested on TLS: 'Order Out of Chaos,' by Ilya
Prigogine & Isabelle Stengers.

You might hold some reservations as you read this, because Prigogine, as
did Einstein, leans to the deterministic side. What I really like is
the way he puts the second law of thermodynamics in a 'better'
perspective. He says that entropy has two terms: one dissipative (Ken,
pay attention here :), and one productive. The latter is compatible
with the increasing complexity of life which we relate to DQ.

It is a good book, but other weaknesses from my perspective are that
Prigogine talks about closed or isolated systems. In the quantum and
MoQ worlds, neither of these is possible, (my perception). The concept
of isolation is a classical one. It suffers the illusion that one may
observe an object in total isolation. We know that is not true, and
that in reality as we observe the object we affect it and vice versa
too. That is why I recently introduced the term co-aware in TLS'
discussions of MoQ.

Doug Renselle.
> Another phrase of Pirsig`s, maybe someone familiar with
> physics such as Doug or Ken, could help me out with, is the
> following:
>
> "Atoms are created by the preference of quantum forces for
> certain stable relationships. These quantum forces are not
> objects of any kind. They are believed to have existed
> before the Big Bang and can be shown to exist today in
> absolute atomic vacuums. They are just patterns of
> prefence that appear out of what is called mass-energy.
> But if one asks what is this mass-energy independently of
> its preferences one finds oneself thinking of nothing
> whatsoever.
>
Anthony,

See my recent emails on VED, VES, Casimir, virtual particles, vacuum
flux, etc. Same stuff. VED: Vacuum Energy Density, VES: Vacuum
Energy Space.

Doug.
> (letter from Robert Pirsig, March 23, 1997)
>
> I am giving a paper on February 12th on the MOQ to the
> other post-grads so I would like to know if there are any
> physics books (or physicists) which would support the view
> expounded by Pirsig above.
>
Anthony,

Do you have Copernic or a similar multi-engine search tool? It would
help you quickly find material on the net on each of the above topics.

Also search pages like www.sciencemag.org. I assume Nature has a page.
Plus most of the Physics journals have pages.

I have a few references which may help:

1) 'The Quantum Universe,'
by Hey & Walters, pp. 131-2 -- subjects: Vacuum Force, Casimir
2) 'The Tao of Physics,'
by Fritjof Capra, p. 222 - subjects: physical vacuum, virtual particles
3) 'The Cosmic Code,'
by Heinz Pagels, pp. 243-247 - subjects: vacuum, flux, etc.
(Note: Pagels, to me, is much like Pirsig. Deceased. Famous wife
Elaine, survives. He was past director of the NY Academy of Sciences.)
4) 'The Story of the Quantum,'
by Banesh Hoffman, pp. 250-52 - subjects: vacuum, virtual particles
(Note: This is old material, dated, but clean, simple perspectives.)
5) 'In The Beginning,'
by John Gribbin, pp. 246-50 - subjects: flux, Casimir, v. particles
(Note: Gribbin is one of my favorite author's although he uses a broad
brush. This book covers a lot of ground, fast. I found some
questionable stuff here too.)
6) 'The Meaning of Quantum Theory,'
by Jim Baggott, p. 183 - subjects: flux, virtual particles
(Note: If you want to learn the mathematics (Ken!) this is a good place
to start. Also see David Albert's book, 'Quantum Mechanics and
Experience.' Albert is a Bohmian determinist, however.)
7) 'The Quantum Society,'
by Danah Zohar & Ian Marshall, p. 238 - subjects: vacuum energy