[Lloyd Gillespie]

Lying about others, in others threads, isn't nice, NObody... You're going to be getting yourself banned...

Lloyd

Originally Posted by N0B0DY Like in 30 Days of Night, Lloyd, "No god." Both Ayn Rand and nature contradict themselves. Like you said: [Lie 1.] "As to laws of nature, they are only our understandings of how she works. Nature needs no laws, she just is, and just happens, as she does. The laws are our abstract knowledge of her self-mechanics. Just as a car runs, so does a universe." Cars, and the observable universe, run according to strict mecjanical laws, Lloyd. Yet the question remains simple, can there possibly be absolute motion? I have my own thread, Dave, and you don't participate. Primarily I'm thinking because of its paradoxical nature. However, this thread is seen as a shot in the foot, like I attempt to negate chirality and Lloyd plasters chirality all over the place. I'm not all that retarded, Dave. [Lie 2.] Your thread is about motion, and I ask you to explain how anything can possibly move if all things at their furthest refinement are the same? Or, do you, like Lloyd, claim that absolute motion is relative as well? [Lie 3.]

[dleviwing]

If you truly wish to discuss paradoxes then consider the thinking that we have matter that is living and matter that is non-living. If it’s all the same stuff then why not say all matter is a living substance?

[Profpat]

I'm willing to say that David. I think the whole universe is alive, just as I believe the Earth to be a living entity.

Is your FS living, like a living tissue or something? Or is it just cold ( warm ) substance.

Best to all,

Pat

P.S. The fact that I am living, while not a paradox, surely is a mystery.

The 3 big mysteries:
1) How the universe came to be.
2) How life came to be
3) How intelligent life came to be

[Fluent Piffle]

Motion IS 'life'. Humans separate the movement of things into describable 'boxes', but the wider Cosmos does no such thing, in its reality.


pif.

[MJA]

Nature's Paradox

If it is true that there is no paradox in nature,
And all paradoxes are man made,
And it is also true that man is nature,
Then there is a true natural paradox,
Nature's paradox is man.

=
MJA

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by MJA If it is true that there is no paradox in nature, And all paradoxes are man made, And it is also true that man is nature, Then there is a true natural paradox, Nature's paradox is man.

Not bad reasoning MJA, but the second line is a false premise.. Paradoxes are not man made, a more correct description is that some events are incorrectly seen by man as a paradox. This is thru lack of understanding or technology.

The statement (final line) that natures paradox is man cannot be supported by a false premise.

Here is a true Paradox

As I was going up the stair
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish the F!@^# he'd go away

cool bananas ... greg

[Fluent Piffle]

As I was going up the stair I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish the F!@^# he'd go away

I don't think we need to be so 'anti'-people who think they are not there(?) - (anyone specific in mind?), for they too are merely trying to understand the same predicament we Humans have inherited, that of our own opposition to Nature's Reality. This is our 'cure', this understanding. There are many mis-conceptual layers to peel back, and the onion keeps making us cry, distorting our views with our own veils of tears...


pif.

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by Fluent Piffle I don't think we need to be so 'anti'-people who think they are not there(?) - (anyone specific in mind?),

Perhaps your right Pif .... I didn't think it was so obvious.

As for the poem, I didn't write it. It was written by William Hughes Mearns

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hughes_Mearns

The original

Yesterday upon the stair
I met a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today
Oh how I wish he'd go away.

The not so original (appeared in Mad Mag after Watergate)

There was a man upon the stair
When I looked back, he wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today
I think he's from the CIA.

cool bananas ... greg

[N0B0DY]

"If you truly wish to discuss paradoxes then consider the thinking that we have matter that is living and matter that is non-living. If it’s all the same stuff then why not say all matter is a living substance?"

Because I'm saying that all matter is non-living, Dave. Matter isn't alive, but "you" think that you are.

0 lies, Lloyd. You just don't pay attention to where periods are.

[Graybeard]

Dear Nobody ... researching on some of the things you said I turned up the following. I am not saying I'm a convert or even close, but I'm pasting it here because I found it interesting and it seems to be saying what your saying.

A fundamental property of elements is that they are made up of atoms that are absolutely identical in every respect. Electrons are similarly identical, as are subatomic particles Time is subdivided into increasingly small partitions until there is reached an almost (but not quite) infinitesimally small division hypothesized as the "Planck instant," in which, like the tick of a clock, quantum states change from one condition to another The simplest explanation is often the best: the Plank instant is not infinitely small, it is actually eternally large, though we cannot perceive it as such, because within that instant time in the entire universe (as the objects composed of atoms perceive it) stops The next simple explanation refers to the absolute identicality of atoms as well as the elements of which atoms are composed: the only thing that can be identical to an object is that object itself. The moment there is another object, no matter how similar it may originally have been, the two objects necessarily begin to diverge, and the identicality is lost Therefore, the simple explanation is that there is only one atom of each kind, or even that there is only one of each subatomic particle, or perhaps only one subatomic particle which manifests itself in different aspects as far as we can observe it. However, there is only one, and within the infinitely large Plank instant, it manifests itself as all the things in the universe David Lance Goines

http://www.goines.net/Writing/time_space.html

cool bananas ... greg