Lol, how is that possible? "Digital hug" technology has improved. Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you!
-----Original Message----- From: Ash <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 11:34:44 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Eternity Heh, how about a digital hug or handshake. My lady love could be comfortable with that. You guys are gonna force me to drop this pseudonym, but I'm still having paranoia/anxiety issues on that matter. :p On 12/11/2010 2:38 AM, iam deheretic wrote: > Hmmmmm . . . . blown digital one year kisses! for Ashly > Allan > > > On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Ash <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Well put DW, I've had a post lingering for followup but didn't > like how I was coming across. You've summed nicely. > > It is that time of year again, yes I am starting my Hershey's > Special Dark regimen. Wow, I'm almost a 1yr ME visitor (what do I > get?). > > > On 12/10/2010 10:26 AM, DarkwaterBlight wrote: > > Surely all that is alien to us seems a bit shocking upon the > interim. > These conceptions that we are under will change and evolve > over the > course of years or hundreds or thousandsof years as required > by the > times. It all seems to be rather mystical but is quite natural as > Tolstoy points out. > > On Dec 10, 6:40 am, rigsy03<[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I think I am more interested in how systems of rarefied > thought > motivate cultures and characters. Isn't it existential > thinking- > Sartre- that points to will and action as the highest > human task?//I > should also correct my flip remark- humanity seems > impossible rather > than men, alone. History is one shock after another. > > On Dec 9, 12:57 am, Ash<[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Considering inert matter I think there is a lot of > information: physical > properties, spatio/temporal locale, history. History > is interesting > because even inert matter would leave a wake. Or under > the right > circumstances could play a very important role in some > event present or > future. The interesting part of exercising information > as a higher > abstraction than physical properties is that things > are promoted in many > more angles (sounds like a founding principle, where's > my pen?!). > Energy is still as useful a tool as always, I think > information and > energy may be synonymous on many levels (some of which > should prove in > favor of energy). These are all tools for the mind, > just showing off my > shiny new socket wrench (new to me anyways *wink). May > have > misunderstood your meaning. > On 12/8/2010 4:22 PM, rigsy03 wrote: > > Are you saying there is no such thing as inert > matter?//Who pulled the > "trigger" to pure energy? > On Dec 8, 1:11 pm, Ash<[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 12/8/2010 12:26 PM, Pat wrote: > > On Dec 8, 4:57 pm, > DarkwaterBlight<[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Not to mention that "work" is also > kinetic energy! ;) > > There is nothing that isn't energy. Well, > to my knowledge, I, nor no > one of which I know, has discovered > anything that isn't some form of > energy. The only argument I can think of > that may lead someone there > is if someone demanded that 'nothing' had > to consist of some > underlying substance (although I view that > argument as a false > premiss, as nothing is simply that which > does not exist and has NO > substance). If one conceded an underlying > substance to 'nothing', > then that substance could be called > 'non-existence' and MAY, in a > twisted way, be viewed as something other > than energy; but, as non- > existence, by definition, does not exist, > one would never find > anything--even to the inclusion of a > 'nothing'--that would be made of > it. > Like I said, it's the only arguent that > leads anywhere close; but, I > thik it's a black hole of an idea in that > the idea sucks so much, it > sucks itself to oblivion. ;-) > > An idea I have been enjoying even more than > 'all is energy' is that "all > is information". In my view whereas we can say > 'all is energy' we mean > composition but abstracting any phenomena, > object, interaction into > types of information promotes a fundamentally > universal layer to compare > vastly divergent fields: eg the accumulation > of density producing > gravity (which could be seen as another > density in space/time), and the > similarities to dynamically evolving, self > organizing systems of > information (life, virii) as a higher form of > information (greater ratio > of potential:matter-density) as the formula to > understand the > similarities and differences of how (factors) > each operates within their > environments (space/time). This to me would > also eventually lead to key > identifiers for what we are (potentials), > where we are (bounded > attraction differentials). A consequence of > this system is the inherent > intelligence of the cosmos. I can't put it > into words well right now, > but I see that many earlier ideas have helped > spawn this and the name > that's stuck with me is 'super-intelligent > design'. More pseudoscience > than anything really until I can rerun my > memory/experiences and get it > all written down. (time, time, time...)- Hide > quoted text - > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > -- > ( > ) > I_D Allan > > If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken > Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools, >
