> !Z:
> Is "matter" a property vs "not matter"?

what would it be  a property *of* ?

> later you substituted 'matter' with 'substrate' when you drew the identity
> as being "interchangeable" to. So is radiation "matterly matter" or an
> interchange? I told you I am nitpicking.

The traditional  matter/energy distinction maps onto the fermion/boson

> I am not accepting the identification of existence as "exist" must be.

I don't see what you mean by that.

>  Then
> you bring in "things" and "concepts", hard to follow, when you deny the
> existence of HP things "literally" existing ONLY in the mind.

You don't *literally* have wizards and dragons in your mind.

> You missed a reply about the numbers.
> Destroying 'matter'? one mysterious way is to let it be absorbed in a BH,

Conservation laws are still obeyed.

> the other - with your words - to 'interchange' (I still did not get whether
> radiation IS matter or only "interchangeable" into).

It is a form of the substrate.

> I wanted to illustrate that the "words" we use are captured by different
> persons in different meanings/connotations.
> Once it comes to non-conventional thoughts, we do not have the words.
> I hope I did not irritate you. I tried hard to be difficult.
> John M
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "1Z" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Everything List" <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 3:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Difficulties in communication. . .
> >
> >

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to