Hi Brent,
Brent: ' > You seem to imply that the advent of the scientific
method banished slavery and tyranny and racism. Would that it
were so. Perhaps the scientific method can be applied to
politics and perhaps it would have that effect, but historically
the scientific method has been use
Mark Peaty wrote:
> History has not finished yet, and I am proposing that we try to
> ensure that it doesn't.
>
> If you truly think I am wrong in my assertion, then you have a
> moral duty to show me - and the rest of the world - on the basis
> of clear and unambiguous empirical evidence wher
History has not finished yet, and I am proposing that we try to
ensure that it doesn't.
If you truly think I am wrong in my assertion, then you have a
moral duty to show me - and the rest of the world - on the basis
of clear and unambiguous empirical evidence where and how I am
wrong. Without
On 22/06/07, Mark Peaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MP:
Who is to say what mbranes really are, except that in this
interpretation of the idea, each IS its own existence; I assume
we can say nothing definite about how each such existence would
compare with others or anything much about 'where' they
MN: 'If an
>> mbrane interpenetrates another, this would provide
>> differentiation and thus the beginnings of structure.
>
> Yes, this may be an attractive notion. I've wondered about myself.
> 'Interpenetration' - as a species of interaction - still seems to
> imply that different 'mbranes' ar
This is completely arbitrary and history does not show this.
Quentin
2007/6/22, Mark Peaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> CDES = Compassion, Democracy, Ethics, and Scientific method
>
> These are prerequisites for the survival of civilisation.
>
> Regards
>
> Mark Peaty CDES
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
CDES = Compassion, Democracy, Ethics, and Scientific method
These are prerequisites for the survival of civilisation.
Regards
Mark Peaty CDES
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.arach.net.au/~mpeaty/
David Nyman wrote:
> On Jun 21, 8:03 pm, Mark Peaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I always
DN: '
> I meant here by 'symmetry-breaking' the differentiating of an 'AR
> field' - perhaps continuum might be better - into 'numbers'. My
> fundamental explanatory intuition posits a continuum that is
> 'modulated' ('vibration', 'wave motion'?) into 'parts'. The notion of
> a 'modulated conti
8 matches
Mail list logo
