clark (clark@netsites.net)
Fri, 11 Sep 1998 13:45:36 +0100
Horse wrote:
in addition,
there is also the problem that if patterns of value at a quantum level
are non-deterministic then how are other levels, which are supported
by this level, deterministic.
Clark wrote:
The Quantum level seems to be a whipping boy against determinism, among
other things.
If the Quantum level is really non-deterministic then how is it that we
live in such a predictable universe at the inorganic level. It seems
obvious to me that the results of the actions at the Quantum level always
produce predictable results. Otherwise how will we know that Wal-Mart will
always be at the same place when we need a pair of socks or some motor oil.
We do not understand the Quantum level but we always observe predictable
results. Current theory tells us that all else rests on the workings within
the Planck time and distance. I would be interested in Jonathan's thoughts
on this.
Anthony wrote:
There is no point discussing secondary issues (such as
free-will and determinism) if we don't have a good grasp of
the foundations of the MOQ. I know that to find the
essence of DQ is difficult, maybe impossible, but I'd
certainly like to explore it in some more depth (sooner
rather than later).
Clark wrote:
I agree with this point of view. Until we decide where Dynamic Quality
begins, its relationship to Quality, and whether it is God or Process, we
can't reach any firm conclusions. I would suspect that we will end up with
at least two views of Q and DQ.
Personally, I am of the Frisbetarian faith. When I die my soul will go up
on the roof and get stuck. Ken
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:46 CEST