From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Mar 27 2004 - 13:38:14 GMT
Mark:
Platt (previously)
> I'm still waiting evidence from you or anyone that the particles, atoms
> and forces that make up the inorganic level are evolving into new
> particles, atoms or forces, or creating new molecules such as DNA.
Mark:
> The Inorganic level is composed of Inorganic patterns of value. We both
> agree upon this? The question you pose is, are these Inorganic patterns
> evolving? Let us consider two related questions? 1. What is evolution? 2.
> What evidence is there for 1?
> An answer to 1. may be phrased as follows: Patterns evolve in response to
> DQ, and migrate toward DQ as their evolutionary goal. This IS preference.
Pirsig says only a living being can respond to DQ. Iron filings have a
preference for magnets, but they are not evolving. So 'preference' doesn't
mean migrating to an evolutionary goal as you suggest.
> What patterns prefer is their Dynamic ability to choose in the context of a
> protecting static latch - evolution.
> I hope you agree with this Platt?
What little choice inorganic values have is restricted to static patterns.
So, no, I don't agree.
> Let us address 2. Inorganic Preferences are the result of 1, evidence for
> this may be:
>
> Atoms: Stellar fusion processes? i.e. Dynamic preference into higher
> quality static latches. Here, complex atomic structures such as Oxygen,
> Carbon, Iron, Sulphur, indeed the whole periodic table, evolve from simpler
> Hydrogen and Helium atoms. This is an ongoing process - new Stellar systems
> are evolving throughout the cosmos.
Stellar fusion processes are static patterns observed and well understood
in terms of static causes and effects by astronomers. Nothing new evolving
here that hasn't been going on for eons.
> Particles: The repertoire of particles appears to have stabilised? This
> would indicate that an earlier phase of Inorganic evolution has almost run
> its course? Dynamic preference into higher quality static latches has done
> well. Having said this, it is now thought that Neutrinos 'decayed' to form
> the repertoire if current particles, and this process may be a remnant of
> that earlier phase and continuing in a slower fashion today. Evidence for
> this was discovered very recently in Japan and Canada.
The fact that natural processes are continuing, such as chemical
reactions, is no evidence of responses to DQ.
> Forces: The speed of light and Gravitational constants may not be as
> 'constant' as believed? It is now thought the speed of light is slowing
> down at an immeasurable rate. So, at the beginning of the cosmos, light was
> able to transmit information throughout the cosmic egg and help create the
> relatively smooth texture observed in the distribution of Galactic
> structures. Again, we see here an earlier phase of the evolution of
> Inorganic patterns fading.
You think the speed of light is slowing down due to DQ"s evolutionary
force for betterness? As I've said before, change by itself is no certain
indicator of DQ's influence.
> Now here is an important point: The lower levels of the MoQ may be
> condemned to begin to fail in their drive for DQ? But as a result of that
> drive and failure, they pass through a 'sweet spot' of evolution at which
> point the next level of evolution takes advantage. That point in the
> Inorganic repertoire was the Carbon atom. Carbon atoms are still evolving
> in Stellar systems.
If carbon atoms are still being created in stellar systems, it's a static
system doing the creating, not DQ. Again, processes understood by science
that create predictable results are static patterns.
Best regards,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 27 2004 - 13:53:41 GMT