SP:' You wouldn't necessarily be squashed if you were inside the event
horizon of a black hole provided that it was massive enough. Being
inside the event horizon is not the same as being inside the singularity.'
MP: Two thoughts come to my suspicious mind.
1/ [Not far from the
2 objections:
A. If I state that i cannot do something that does not (logically) imply
that I CAN do another thing.
B. Your last line is your opinion substantiated by nothing, I appreciate
anybodies opinion as such, it may have a personal (not factual) meaning -
weight.
We diverted from my
Stathis:
your starting the argument: IF the M-W-I(dea) is valid, it it seems to
imply...which is a bit shaky (what if not?) - the law-like is a breakable
compromise between confro nting arguments. Do I read some denigration of the
White Rabbit? (coming from a wide interpretation of all
I feel a misunderstanding here:
origination point IMO is part of the item to be originated, the pertinent
'point' (within and for) the evolving total to grow out from.
As I used 'origination refers to the entailment producing such point - if we
use a 'point' to start with.
Such 'point' is the
On 3/9/07, Mark Peaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MP: Two thoughts come to my suspicious mind.
1/ [Not far from the post-Freudian speculation :-] ... Attendance
within the event horizon of a common or garden galactic variety black
hole would seem to incorporate a one-way ticket *to* the
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 3/7/07, Stathis Papaioannou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/07, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Caylor wrote:
I agree with the Russell quote as it stands. Unendingness is not what
gives meaning. The source of meaning is not living
On 3/9/07, John M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stathis:
your starting the argument: IF the M-W-I(dea) is valid, it it seems to
imply...which is a bit shaky (what if not?) - the law-like is a breakable
compromise between confro nting arguments. Do I read some denigration of the
White Rabbit?
On 3/9/07, Tom Caylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
You could replace love with chocolate and God with the
chocolate
fairy. You can claim that while the reason people like chocolate can
be
explained in terms of chemistry, physiology, evolutionary biology
etc.,
8 matches
Mail list logo
