Physicists Losing Their Grip??

"Consc" <cons_cie@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1103719993.670932.218330@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

Great post, thanks.


At least some physicists have a clue.


I expect Bohr was quite able to sum up his opinion. Mermin coming into
relation with it effected a new (and probably) inferior effect.


"Effect, through, and indeed as, relationship 'of forces' and somewhat
first person".


When physicists, like 'philosophers', have tired of riggling their
butts they will say yes to "Effect, through, and indeed as,
relationship 'of forces', indefinite, dynamic and somewhat first
person".


Probably, Russell, like virtually all the rest of them, was still
struggling to get past the letter "A" of the philosophy alphabet.


.... a ring of "inferentially multi-faceted" here.


And which is the better seller currently?


Yeah, as well as speed being constant across frames ..., through time
dilation - matter contraction - curved lines are straight through
space being curved - thereby retaining c.


Elephant in a china shop.


'Easy on argumentation - and a little more assertion, please.'





Elephant in a china shop.


If I may say so, smart guy - well on the way to value as relational.


As a Relativist, he would.


******* ****** ******* *************.


Here we go again, reverting back to presumed discrete entities.

(Matter is matter in so far as matter is matter,
And this matters in so far as it matters.
Yet some would ask, "If it all flew away would it matter?")

Are phenomena created out of sheet nothingness or

"Not machinery but [Effectuationism] may be the better description of
the treasure that is waiting."

--
Peter Kinane
[Only registered users see links. ]