Hello orn Precisely!, thank you for adding that. Even in a binary system, (the smallest system conceivable), there is a need of a third component/element in play, which is a process bridging the only two instances
In summary, IMO, there is always: 1 a physic component, 2 the absence of that component (emptiness) 3 a connection thank you On 2 out, 13:33, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > Excellent post ein. Of course, by extension, I agree. > > Over the years I have been contemplating a codified philosophical > system that does just what you imply. However, it includes both the > union of what you metaphorically have called ‘0’ and 1 as well as a > predetermined process involving cycles from one state to another...not > just a static binary. > > On Oct 2, 6:07 am, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > This group is lately almost silent > > My subject is linguistics, so I will take advantage of this silence to > > point the obvious, which is usually not so clear. > > > When talking, in any language, there is always a silent portion/ > > segment, words, letters, sentences, need that silence to identify > > itselves. > > > Also when we write. Silence when we write is represented by "empty" > > space. > > > There is empty space in all cases, or silence. Being perhaps the most > > important component of language. > > > Even if I write: > > > thisgroupislatelyalmostsilentmysubjectislinguisticssoiwilltakeadvantageofth > > issilencetopointtheobviouswhichisusuallynotsoclear > > > Even so, to convey any meaning the reader will add "missing" "empty" > > space to the above, which is the first sentence of this post. > > > Silence, empty space, or whatever instance this represents, conveys > > meaning. It is not null, but empty. This means that in language, > > emptiness is treated the same way as any positive sign. > > > As in computer science as well, where the sign "0" represents the > > absence of a material dot. > > Binary systems need 2 values and curiously, the first is "0" > > > That absence has no lesser status that any other sign, and more than > > that is needed as part of the system. > > > If this is valid to language, and there are a lot of languages (also > > not human), why should be any different in Physics, or Nature, or > > Chemistry, whatever. > > > It is hard to see out there knowledge approaches talking about > > emptiness in this sense, there are examples of course. Poetry for > > instance, and many other. > > > rgds --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
