We'll all end up doing the hoovering at this rate. Much is defined by what it is not. A vacuum is in a tube we have used the vacuum pump on. We stick the smouldering taper into such a tube and it goes out. In the tube with the oxygen in, it relights. Some Belgian guy looks at mayonaisse and concludes vacuums are only empty (of certain stuff) on average. I look at the bastard who's just put some on my chips as a thoughtless get who should have asked me. I am vacuous compared with the Belgian guy, but at least can't be accused of spoiling chips with yellow muck. We model space between protons and electrons, then fire neutrons at water and are 'told' it is H 1.5 O and begin talk of entanglement. Georges breathes fire. I was at a conference with some poncey organisational aestheticists some years back. An Italian said hypertext was a visual medium. I said bollox - my blind mate was aware of it. We laughed and had a drink. I liked him. One day, we may fly to the stars on energy tapped from the vacuum (I favour a Heath Robinson device based on my Mum's old Hoover Junior). Is light skiing over the Higg's Field that other material can only swim in treacle through? You are right in this 'logic' Carlos.
On 1 Dec, 12:21, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > IMHO vacuum it is only possible in language, and frankly I doubt that > too, because we need the word to refer it. I agree there is no vacuum. > Although there is a meaning, this is, we refer to vacuum, and that's > it. > > On 30 nov, 10:24, michael atovigba <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Just to observe that what is called a vacuum contains either light to enable > > physicists see that there is nothing inside the vacuum or darkness to > > frustrate them from seeing anything inside the space in question. But > > Eistein has told us that light is made of ether which is a particle hence > > the vacuum theory is nullified. If the vacuum contains darkness, but > > darkness is the oposite of light hence it too is matter incorporated, may > > be we called anti-ether. Consequently there is no vacuum. > > -Garshagu Atovigba > > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:17 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Today's Topic Summary > > > > Group:http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/topics > > > > - Different points of > > > view.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[13 > > > Updates] > > > - Relativity One almost ready to use black > > > fuel<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[3 > > > Updates] > > > - Some ‘True’ Physical and Religious fables and > > > fantasies.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1 > > > Update] > > > - Virgin Mary - new > > > advent<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1 > > > Update] > > > - [epistemology 0] Digest for [email protected] - 3 > > > Messages in 2 > > > Topics<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1 > > > Update] > > > - B.O.DI.C.E.A. > > > C.A.N.C.E.R.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1 > > > Update] > > > - Claude Levi-Strauss > > > dies<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[3 > > > Updates] > > > > Topic: Different points of > > > view.<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/e352b1aa9c1664fe> > > > > ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 27 12:57PM -0800 > > > > I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your > > > own research. > > > > "Serenity Smiles" <[email protected]> Nov 27 07:32PM > > > > Madhayamaka Buddhism vis a vis Hindu vedanta - this is a very good site > > > to > > > visit. have not studied it fully myself yet > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > From: "nominal9" <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 4:57 PM > > > To: "Epistemology" <[email protected]> > > > Subject: [epistemology 10995] Re: Different points of view. > > > > archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:06PM -0800 > > > > I would doubt Nom that any of this kind of void has anything to do > > > with thoughts in physics about the nature of emptiness. This is about > > > essential conditions in being. I'd admit to some similarities with > > > relativity. There is stuff to learn from these sources though I don't > > > see it boiling down to much. > > > > On 27 Nov, 19:32, "Serenity Smiles" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:13PM -0800 > > > > 'Holes' come in for much philosophical treatment too. Early atomist > > > theories made much of them and voids. Newton got rather a long way by > > > construing space as separate from body. If the experience of > > > emptiness is to make all relative then I can't make it as I'm sure I > > > wouldn't stay here if all was such. > > > > ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 27 11:25PM -0800 > > > > “… If the experience of emptiness is to make all relative then I can't > > > make it as I'm sure I wouldn't stay here if all was such.” – archy > > > > No need to leave then Neil! > > > > As far as I can tell, there is no ‘making’ involved…such activity > > > would be like standing before one of Van Gogh’s Starry Night paintings > > > and tagging it (spray painting it). In this sense, what is …is. > > > > In an apparently different sense, any such analysis of anything > > > apprehended through the senses will include a related conceptual > > > nature (as well as a contextual nature). Emptiness merely means the > > > truth that anything is empty of inherent existence. No thing/thought > > > arises out of nothing. Further, such things have component parts. If > > > they are conceptual or perceptual, specific thoughts/words etc. are > > > involved and have direct links to it and those so linked things are a > > > part and parcel of the thing currently under investigation. Thus, it > > > is related to other things/thoughts/concepts etc. Being so related > > > directly implies a relationship and relative nature. This all > > > identifies the set of relative/subjective ‘mind’. > > > > There also exists that which has no components or movement. This is > > > the absolute/objective ‘mind’. > > > > And, we have in fact produced a synthetic separation here too. > > > > On a more mundane level, Albert E.’s addition of relativity to western > > > thought has helped to support and change previous anti-metaphysical > > > views. The result is the philosophical corner currently most find > > > themselves painted into. A more practical level helps one to > > > understand how politicians, educators, thinkers etc. now find no > > > ‘center’…no ethos other than one without a possibility of actual > > > ethics. This because ‘everything is relative’. Well, it is for their > > > thinking…but not in any other way. > > > > Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> Nov 27 11:29PM -0800 > > > > ============= > > > G: > > > There are no "thoughts in physics about the nature of emptiness". > > > Physics never met her. > > > Georges > > > ================ > > > > socratus <[email protected]> Nov 28 02:56AM -0800 > > > > > Georges > > > > ================ > > > > I would doubt Nom that any of this > > > kind of void has anything to do > > > with thoughts in physics about the nature of > > > emptiness. > > > / archytas <[email protected]> / > > > > =============== . > > > # > > > Don’t be doubt ‘ archytas <[email protected]> ‘ > > > 1. > > > Thermodynamics meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 2. > > > Maxwell electrodynamics meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 3. > > > SRT meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 4 > > > GRT meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 5. > > > Atom meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 6. > > > Outer space meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > 7. > > > Religion doesn’t exist without the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum. > > > == . > > > # > > > When the next revolution rocks physics, > > > chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless > > > infinite void. > > > http://discovermagazine.com/topics/space > > > > > > > http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-o... > > > !!!!!!!!!!! > > > ================ . . > > > > archytas <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:09AM -0800 > > > > Surely there are some thoughts Georges, otherwise how do we arrive at > > > the notion of something 'empty' only on average? > > > > archytas <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:10AM -0800 > > > > Relativity can be traced to much earlier times than Einstein. I'm not > > > sure the corner is painted to anyway. Most current problems are to do > > > with idiot thinking. > > > > Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:25AM -0800 > > > > ============ > > > G: > > > Not in physics. And even in current language "empty glass" means > > > having no wine, but contains air. And words are there to HINT > > > the meaning, but taken verbatim hide it. > > > Georges > > > ============== > > > > nominal9 <[email protected]> Nov 28 06:31AM -0800 > > > > I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your > > > own research. / Ornamentalmind > > > > Oh, so that;s the way of it, is it?... Well, if you're going to be > > > "snooty".... let me be a bit "sarcastic" in return....If I assume that > > > this "void" exists only in some contemplative or meditative state > > > attained in the mind of the Adept... does that mean that the said > > > Adept-practitioner is .... empty-headed?.... > > > nominal9 > > > > ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 28 08:47AM -0800 > > > > ...for you, the 'lazy' one, it is nom! :-) > > > > ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 28 08:52AM -0800 > > > > Interesting notion archy...idiot thinking. With almost 20 million > > > Google hits, one would think I should know what it means. Alas, I am > > > lacking in that regard…having no specific tenets for this class of > > > thought let alone other criteria for it other than obviously I don’t > > > think that way. (irony) > > > > Topic: Relativity One almost ready to use black > > > fuel<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/d1cbda86735dced9> > > > > archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:21PM -0800 > > > > There are some interesting bits and pieces around about close to light > > > flight using dark matter. This would allow rapid acceleration to near > > > the speed of light, but has a downside in that we would have to get > > > close to the galaxy centre to find enough of the stuff (one reason the > > > aliens ain't here is because we > > ... > > read more » -- 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.
