Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590112
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Small enough- to be zero? |
| Date | 2016-07-20 13:18 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nmofa9$1pj4$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <e8503c4a-fcb9-4b07-b8ac-efae66bd79cf@googlegroups.com> |
On 7/20/2016 1:11 PM, john wrote: > Some posters, here, think that > at small enough scales, there > are no more particles. Just energy > of some sort, I suppose. Yes. > I'm guessing these are the same > ones who deny that organization > might be found on a Cosmic scale. No, no denying that. Just not the same kind of organization you see in atoms. > 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. Heck no. Intelligent life almost certainly exists elsewhere in the universe. Just not very likely to be close enough to us to visit us in little ships. Nor very likely to be interested enough in us to make the visit. > And probably, also, > total atheists. Well, I'm sure there are some on both sides of that camp. > > Hmm. Just trying to see the pattern: > they're in pattern-denial > Maybe some of the patterns you see are you jumping to enormous and unsubstantiated conclusions. Such as: Everybody that disbelieves one thing you believe also disbelieves everything else you believe. Such as: Anybody who doesn't believe what you believe is in denial. (What arrogance, John!) -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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