Hi Magnus,Hi Roger, Hi All,
Thanks for your reply! Originally, I wanted to answer it in a profound way and
intented to do some more thinking about this, before I'd write on it, but as you
may have noticed, I decided to keep away from MoQ, at least for a while, but
supposingly until I finished my studies.
It was much fun in these last weeks, but as I receded to much - almost
completeley now - from my normal Uni-business, it looks as if I only could do
this, by a sharp cut, though I will miss these discussions in the future. In
fact I HAVE problems to share my day time into reasonable parts on different
tasks.
>
> Hi Johannes
>
> Glad to hear that old post are still appreciated.
Johannes had written:
> > What problem I do have with the levels, they're those are too rough. I think,
> > that having only four areas or zones to distinguish value-beings and also their
> > complement in mind the intellectual patterns of value, is at least one reason
> > for difficulties to find a reliable assertion of the named (s.a.). So my model
> > is similar to Magnus' dimension-model, but it tries to find a refined grid, in
> > order to achieve a better solution of observation (like that of TV). Only with
> > a refined grid, a zooming-in is possible, i.e. is making sense. (see also my
> > last post to MF/Nov).
Magnus Berg answered:
> I have to start by admitting to my lack of presence in MD the last few months, so I'm
> afraid I'm not up to speed about your model with a refined grid. But I'd like to give
> some feedback anyway.
>
> The danger with a refining of the grid is that you might cause platypi. I.e. if you make
> a division that makes sense for the moment, it might backfire later on if you discover
> that it causes a single entity to fall in two compartments. Like that poor platypus that
> was both an egg layer and a mammal.
>
> The beauty of the dimensional approach is that it absolutely guarantees that such platypi
> will never happen. The definition of a dimension is that the only way to express anything
> in that dimension is to use a unit of that dimension. For example, the only way to express
> time is by using a unit that expresses time, the only way to express length is by using a
> length unit and so on.
>
> In MoQ terms, the only way to express mass is to use a mass unit, for example kg. This
> might seem to be a half truth since mass can be transformed to energy and therefore
> expressed using an energy unit, for example joule. But since the only level, or dimension,
> involved is the inorganic, we discover that this transformation from mass to energy
> is metaphysically no transformation at all.
>
> Back to your refined grid, what sub-divisions did you have in mind?
>
> Magnus
Johannes
My intention is by refining the levels - representing a larger grid, so to say -
with a smaller grid, in order to better estimate the relation in between the
levels; a creating of a better resolution. More precise as written before, I did
not meant to get there, but much more when I found the alternative system
definition and applied it to the MoQ-level, I saw that it seems to enable a
closer consideration of the levels.
The level definition as it is now, produces lots of problems as we have seen in
the past. Moreover, what never satisfied me from the start - I have pencil
remarks from my first reading on this page - , is the existence of the 4 levels
plus the pair of DQ/sq, which is something different, qualitativeley.
What I have developed after my first idea, was a description of the development
of the universe (very roughly!) and while doing that it appeared to me a basic
charactristic, that the existence of two qualitatively different 'value-beings'
rises the assumption (IMO) of the existence of smaller value-beings (systems)
'making' the bigger one.
The comparism with the levels showed a parallelism between levels on the on hand
and 'dimensions' on the other hand, while there is 'dimension' a sort of
micro-level and I tried to find out, how this relates to the level-shift, so the
moment, where a new level is born or gets created. And also I tried to describe,
how a dimension - or more precise - the dimension compound of all the
dimensions, that exist before is related to a new dimension.
A dimension, IMO, is a new quality, that is necessary for the ongoing of
evolution (that of quality). How exactly this works and if it works really is
more or less quite vague to me until now, but one idea is the following, which I
hope gets clearer in mathematical form (does it? :-) ).
DQ =(Q1)*DQ 1.step
=(Q1*Q2)*DQ 2.step
=((Q1*Q2)*Q3)*DQ 3.step
=(((Q1*Q2)*Q3)*Q4)*DQ 4.step
....
....
<climax - Highpoint of development>
....
....<declining of order>
....
=(Qoo-1)*DQ
=DQ
This descrption has not be taken literally of course, but more in a symbolic
sense and the notation is fairly new. Only the upper half is, what I had in mind
in the first place, the on below is just a completion of this description and I
don't like it too much.
In this description, the steps, the creation of a new quality, represent a new
dimnsion and therefore at some point a new level, but what exactly happens there
is still unclear (level-shift) only that in fact something IS happening.
Except a few especially good definable ones, I have not found particular,
existing dimensions, so far and that is also the reason for holding back my
reply. So, I'm sorry, but I cannot give you the necessary examples that could
show if it works; no flesh, only theory ;-).
Wish you well,
Kind regards,
JoVo
PS.: This countdown stuff should help me, to give me a definite deadline,
otherwise I find lots of excuses for myself that there is still something
'urgent' to say :-))
countdown: 7
"Naa, it is META-QUALITY-coal!! This guy from Pirsig-mines told me that its at
least twice as good as the normal one. Great stuff, isn't it?"
"You know, we should NOT use it on this thing, do you? No more of this, for now,
stop it! Some ENGINEER-coal left then?"
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:54 BST