Re: Small enough- to be zero?

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Small enough- to be zero?
Date	2016-07-23 11:57 +1000
Message-ID	<dvg17pF3r5uU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<e8503c4a-fcb9-4b07-b8ac-efae66bd79cf@googlegroups.com> <dvdd9kFf7a3U1@mid.individual.net> <5791C313.3A39@ix.netcom.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 22/07/2016 4:54 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>> On 21/07/2016 4:11 AM, john wrote:
>>> Some posters, here, think that
>>> at small enough scales, there
>>> are no more particles. Just energy
>>> of some sort, I suppose.
>>> I'm guessing these are the same
>>> ones who deny that organization
>>> might be found on a Cosmic scale.
>>> And, probably, the same ones
>>> who think that Humans are a total fluke
>>> on our Earth alone, and chances
>>> of it happening on some other planet
>>> are nil to none. And probably, also,
>>> total atheists.
>>>
>>> Hmm. Just trying to see the pattern:
>>> they're in pattern-denial
>>>
>>
>> We have no basis for forming a view about the likelihood  of intelligent
>> life on other planets. All we know about intelligent life (and indeed
>> life at all) is that it's possible.
>
>
> No, is that it's impossible.

Unless you think that life on Earth is not intelligent, then you know 
that intelligent life is possible, because it exists on Earth.

Sylvia.

Thread

Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 11:11 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 13:18 -0500
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-20 12:57 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 16:30 -0500
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 14:45 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:06 -0700
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:16 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:42 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:59 -0700
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:58 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 16:32 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 17:03 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 20:06 -0500
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 14:20 +0000
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:51 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 08:25 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:36 -0400
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-22 14:05 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-07-22 14:52 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 15:25 +0000
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 11:25 -0700
                Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-22 00:48 +0000
                haxacontaDELTAhedronic noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 13:47 -0700
                stab a guess (or an i.s.i.s): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:52 -0700
                stab a guess (or those flamethrowers): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:27 -0700
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:55 -0400
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 18:04 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:37 -0400
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:44 -0700
              Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:33 -0400
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 02:08 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Eduardo J. Berringer" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-07-24 11:21 -0700
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-24 12:48 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 09:39 -0700
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 15:21 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:49 -0400
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-22 12:04 +1000
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-21 23:54 -0700
      Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-23 11:57 +1000
        Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:01 -0400
          Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-24 10:52 +1000
            Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 21:25 -0400
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 18:09 -0700
  Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 13:31 -0700
    Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:20 -0400

csiph-web