On 11 November 2013 09:44, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote:
Liz: it all starts with the proper use of words we use so imroperly.
Musttrynottofeelshadenfreude...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To
Liz: it all starts with the proper use of words we use so imroperly.
What is P H Y S I C A L ? the explanational domain where features are
proven by other featires of the explanational theoretical domain? (By
instruments from WITHIN)
What is M E N T A L ? we live in a maze and use 'language'
On 11/10/2013 12:44 PM, John Mikes wrote:
This is why my agnosticism is based on: The only thing we know is We Don't.
Do we really know that?? :-)
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
: 2013-11-08, 23:52:10
Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ?
First of all, there is no evidence that any strings exist. So, the question of
mass is irrelevant, unless for the string theoretician. The theory requires
that strings have mass, but where is the proof? Mathematical
:52:10
Subject: Re: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ?
First of all, there is no evidence that any strings exist. So, the
question of mass is irrelevant, unless for the string theoretician. The
theory requires that strings have mass, but where is the proof?
Mathematical proof
: Friday, November 08, 2013 5:36 AM
To: everything-list ; mailto:mindbr...@yahoogroups.com ; 4dworldx ;
theoretical_physics_board
Subject: [4DWorldx] Is mass mental or physical ?
I need some help.
Yesterday I made the claim that strings
are massless and so are nonphysical (mental, by my
On 10 November 2013 04:11, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote:
Mathematical proof is all that is lacking.
That is that particles like electrons and quarks are strings.
That electrons and quarks have mass is established experimentally
Well, they appear to, in the sense that they interact
I need some help.
Yesterday I made the claim that strings
are massless and so are nonphysical (mental, by my definition).
But you can show theoretically that strings have mass, based on
line tension and other variables. So is mass physical ?
Unless I am mistaken, mass is always defined in
On 08 Nov 2013, at 13:36, Roger Clough wrote:
I need some help.
Yesterday I made the claim that strings
are massless and so are nonphysical (mental, by my definition).
But you can show theoretically that strings have mass, based on
line tension and other variables. So is mass physical ?
9 matches
Mail list logo
