h
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> From: Cass Silva
> Receiver: MindBrain
> Time: 2013-11-07, 18:49:59
> Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] A definition of existence (being twofold)
>
>
>
>
> >Does Gravity have mass?
> >Cass
> >-
iving the following content -
From: Cass Silva
Receiver: MindBrain
Time: 2013-11-07, 18:49:59
Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] A definition of existence (being twofold)
>Does Gravity have mass?
>Cass
>
>On Wed, 6/11/13, Ro
OK!
Moving on.nothing to see here...!
On 6 November 2013 11:28, Richard Ruquist wrote:
> Yes. It proves that Leibniz was incorrect.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:27 PM, LizR wrote:
>
>> That just sounds like definitions. Do they get us anywhere useful?
>>
>>
>> On 6 November 2013 03:21
Yes. It proves that Leibniz was incorrect.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:27 PM, LizR wrote:
> That just sounds like definitions. Do they get us anywhere useful?
>
>
> On 6 November 2013 03:21, Roger Clough wrote:
>
>>
>> Leibniz said that space, being massless, is a nonphysical nonentity.
>> All t
That just sounds like definitions. Do they get us anywhere useful?
On 6 November 2013 03:21, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> Leibniz said that space, being massless, is a nonphysical nonentity.
> All that physically exists then consists of physical objects with mass--
> these
> together with their nonp
Leibniz said that space, being massless, is a nonphysical nonentity.
All that physically exists then consists of physical objects with mass-- these
together with their nonphysical mental massless representations
(as mind or will, consciousness, monads).
Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/
6 matches
Mail list logo
