| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jong Kim" |
| Date: |
27 Jul 2007 01:35:57 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Uncertainty Principle |
"josephus" <dogbird@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:b3Ppi.11952$zA4.2716@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
There is the uncertainty principle.
Certainty Principle:
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
(Book of Mormon | Moroni 10:5)
Uncertainty Principle:
20 For this is denial of the Holy Ghost, yea, even thy sciences are
organized according to this blasphemy, and are based upon the lie that all
things which are eternal are denied by them, that there is no absolute
truth.
Revelations of Jesus Christ 159:20
180 W. Heisenberg
....
This excerpt from Heisenberg's original paper shows his derivation of the
uncertainty relation for momentum and position.
Here Heisenberg transforms the "bell curve" in quantum theory for the
imprecision in the measurement of the position q of a moving electron to the
corresponding bell curve of the measured momentum p. The uncertainty, or
standard deviation, of each curve is delta p=p1 and delta q=q1. Heisenberg
obtains an equal sign for the minimum uncertainty. He later included the
possibility of even greater uncertainty by using the sign for "greater than
or equal to."
Reference:
Zeitschrift für Physik, 43 (1927), 172-198, received 23 March 1927. The
image is from the facsimile reprint in Heisenberg, Gesammelte Werke /
Collected Works, vol. A1, p. 486.
Heisenberg's uncertainty paper has been translated into English by John
Archibald Wheeler and Hubert Zurek, in Quantum Theory and Measurement,
Wheeler and Zurek, eds. (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1983), pp. 62-84.
http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08a1.htm
Update on John Archibald Wheeler, by Ken Ford, Ph.D.
(Princeton Physics News, vol. 2, issue 1, winter 2006, p. 6):
John is much taken with the idea that evolution may not be just a feature
of biology. He wonders whether physical laws and physical constants evolve,
too, through a process of natural selection-whether what we see around us
and the rules that govern our world have not been here "from everlasting to
everlasting" but have been shaped by evolution.
....
Why 3 + 1 dimensions? he asks. Why not more? There is no law against
more. Is the dimensionality of space and time itself a product of natural
selection? And even more importantly: How does something arise from nothing?
He is still fascinated with quantum mechanics and its interpretation. He
ponders the question whether we humans actually create the laws by our
observations, in the way that a magician creates illusion-that what we
observe around us is no more real than what we observe at a magic show. On
his wall hangs a sweatshirt with the logo: What part of quantum theory don't
you understand? He never fails to point it out to his visitors, while asking
with a laugh: How do you like my sweatshirt?
http://www.physics.princeton.edu/www/jh/newsletter.pdf
http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08c.htm
Because the uncertainty relations are more than just mathematical relations,
but have profound scientific and philosophical implications, physicists
sometimes speak of the "uncertainty principle."
Heisenberg also drew profound implications for the concept of causality, or
the determinacy of future events. Schrödinger had earlier attempted to offer
an interpretation of his formalism in which the electron waves represent the
density of charge of the electron in the orbit around the nucleus. Max Born,
however, showed that the "wave function" of Schrödinger's equation does not
represent the density of charge or matter. It describes only the probability
of finding the electron at a certain point. In other words, quantum
mechanics cannot give exact results, but only the probabilities for the
occurrence of a variety of possible results.
Heisenberg took this one step further: he challenged the notion of simple
causality in nature, that every determinate cause in nature is followed by
the resulting effect.
Maurice Allais:
Nature doesn't leave any room to chance and all is determined
by cause and effect relationships. What's called hazard is nothing
but a representation of our ignorance. But the permanent nature of
the statistical laws shows the existence of a hidden order.
~~About the Aether Concept (2003),
translated into English from French
If Richard Feynman were alive, he would philosophically side with Werner
Heisenberg, but his path integral formalism of quantum mechanics based on
the Hamiltonian principle of least action shows differently, as far as his
own work in the field co-founded by Heisenberg. It's no wonder Feynman
declared in his Nobel lecture:
.... I had a point of view - the overall space-time point of view - and a
disrespect for the Hamiltonian method of describing physics. ... This
completes the story of the development of the space-time view of quantum
electrodynamics. I wonder if anything can be learned from it. I doubt it.
.... The path-integral formulation of quantum mechanics was useful for
guessing at final expressions and at formulating the general theory of
electrodynamics in new ways - although, strictly it was not absolutely
necessary. ... Originally, Maxwell filled space with idler wheels, and
Faraday with fields lines, but somehow the Maxwell equations themselves are
pristine and independent of the elaboration of words attempting a physical
description. The only true physical description is that describing the
experimental meaning of the quantities in the equation - or better, the
way the equations are to be used in describing experimental observations.
This being the case perhaps the best way to proceed is to try to guess
equations, and disregard physical models or descriptions.
~~Richard Feynman
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html
http://ivantic.apnoia.org/fizika/feynman/index.html
Feynman on Hawking
Several conversations that Feynman and I had involved the remarkable
abilities of other physicists. In one of these conversations, I remarked to
Feynman that I was impressed by Steven Hawking's ability to do path
integration in his head. Ahh, that's not so great, Feynman replied. It's
much more interesting to come up with the technique like I did, rather than
to be able to do the mechanics in your head. Feynman wasn't being
immodest, he was quite right. The true secret to genius is in creativity,
not in technical mechanics.
http://www.theinfidels.org/zunb-richardpfeynman.htm
"Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's
not why we do it."
"God was invented to explain mystery. God is always invented to explain
those things that you do not understand. Now, when you finally discover how
something works, you get some laws which you're taking away from God; you
don't need him anymore. But you need him for the other mysteries. So
therefore you leave him to create the universe because we haven't figured
that out yet; you need him for understanding those things which you don't
believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness, or why you only live
to a certain length of time -- life and death -- stuff like that. God is
always associated with those things that you do not understand. Therefore I
don't think that the laws can be considered to be like God because they have
been figured out."
~~Richard Feynman
51 And it is in this manner that Satan with his mists of darkness and his
retarding of the human mind, and lies hath deceived you, O man, as
anciently, by the traditions of your fathers which apostatized from mine
ordinances and broke my new and everlasting covenant which I the Father
did make with them.
Revelations of Jesus Christ 24:51
(Received by Art Bulla)
It is vanity, puerility and weakness for men to attempt to gainsay the
designs of God, or to boast of their own intelligence. What do they know?
Why, they discovered awhile ago that there is such a thing as electricity.
Who made that electricity? Did man? Did he originate and place it among
the nature's forces? Did it proceed from the acumen of man's intelligence
and his expansive mind? No, it always existed, and the man who discovered
it--a little smarter than his fellows--only found out one of the laws of
nature that emanated from and originated with God.
~~Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, Pg. 223, John Taylor, May 6, 1870
Freeman Dyson, Professor Emeritus of Physics,
Institute of Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ
(Why is Maxwell's Theory so hard to understand?):
How did it happen that Maxwell's theory was so widely ignored? After all,
Maxwell was not like his contemporary Gregor Mendel, a monk working in an
obscure monastery garden in Bohemia. Maxwell was a famous professor,
director of the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, a leading figure in the
British scientific community. As an indication of his high standing, he was
president of Section A (mathematical and physical sciences) of the British
Association for the Advancement of Science when the association held its
annual meeting at Liverpool in 1870. He gave a presidential address in
Liverpool which was published in volume 2 of the recently founded journal
"Nature". The style of his address shows us why his theory was not taken
seriously. One might have expected that he would take the opportunity
provided by the presidential platform to proclaim to the world the
importance of the discoveries that he had made five years earlier. He did
nothing of the kind. He was absurdly and infuriatingly modest.
http://www.aip.org/ca/currassoc.html
The corporations and laboratories listed are Corporate Associates of the
Institute. The mission of the Corporate Associates program is: {to serve the
industrial physics community by improving the effectiveness of people and
organizations in advancing corporate goals through the use of physics and
associated sciences}.
The American Institute of Physics invites interested corporations and
institutions to apply for Corporate Associates membership ...
2007 Corporate Associates
3M Company
Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics
The Aerospace Corporation
Agilent Laboratories
Battelle Energy Alliance
Corning, Incorporated
Cryogenic Control Systems, Inc.
The Dow Chemical Company
Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.
ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company
ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company
Ford Motor Company
General Atomics
General Electric Corporate R&D
General Motors R&D Center
Hewlett-Packard Company
Hitachi Global Storage Technologies
HRL Laboratories, LLC
IBM Thomas Watson Research Center
Janis Research Company, Inc.
Jobin Yvon Horiba
John Hopkins University/Applied Physics Laboratory
Lake Shore Cryotronics
Lucent Technologies, Bell Laboratories
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
National Institute of Standards & Technology
PARC Palo Alto Research Center
Philips Research
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
Sarnoff Corporation
Schlumberger-Doll Research
Seagate Technologies
Shell E&P Technology Company
Texas Instruments, Inc.
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
UOP, LLC
Xerox Wilson Center for Research & Technology
You cannot measure MASS, velocity, momentum or any contray value
like position vs mementusm or MASS vs velocity at the quantum level.
If you look at an electron, you MUST change its state to know its
previous state, but you can NOT know its new state. the observer rule.
that computation does NOT include the fact you are changing state.
that is why it is called QUANTUM LEVEL.
I think the other thing spintropic does is confuse MATHEMATICS with
a naturel process like quantum states. It took some very clever people
to figure out the non-detemrinism of quantum mechanics.
James Clerk Maxwell:
The general complexion of the treatise [on Electricity and Magnetism by
himself] differs considerably from that of several excellent electrical
works, published, most of them, in Gemany, and it may appear that scant
justice is done to the speculations of several eminent electricians and
mathematicians. One reason of this is that before I began the study of
electricity I resolved to read no mathematics on the subject till I had
first read through Faraday's *Experimental Researches on Electricity*. I was
aware that there was supposed to be a difference between Faraday's way of
conceiving phenomena and that of the mathematicians, so that neither he nor
they were satisfied with each other's language. I had also the conviction
that this discrepancy did not arise from either party being wrong. I was
first convinced of this by Sir William Thomson(*), to whose advice and
assistance, as well as to his published papers, I owe most of what I have
learned on the subject.
~~Preface to *A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I*,
pg. ix (1st ed., 1873)
Michael Faraday:
Professor W. Thomson, in referring to a like view of lines of force applied
to static electricity (1295, 1304), and to Fourier's law of motion for heat,
says that the lines of force give the same mathematical results of Coulomb's
theory, and by more simple processes of analysis (if possible) than the
latter (1); and afterwards refers to the "strict foundation for an analogy
on which the {conducting power of a magnetic medium for lines of force}
may be spoken of." (2)
....
(1) Phil. Mag. 1854, Vol. VIII, p. 53.
(2) Ibid., p. 56.
~~On Some Points of Magnetic Philosophy
(Philosophical Magazine, Feb. 1855)
Also published in Faraday's *Experimental Researches in Electricity*
From an article on William Thomson, a.k.a. Kelvin:
In 1845 he gave the first mathematical development of Faraday's idea that
electric induction takes place through an intervening medium, or
"dielectric", and not by some incomprehensible "action at a distance".
While vacationing with his family in Lamlash in 1841, he wrote a third, more
substantial, P.Q.R. paper On the uniform motion of heat in homogeneous solid
bodies, and its connection with the mathematical theory of electricity.[3]
In the paper he made remarkable connections between the mathematical
theories of heat conduction and electrostatics, an analogy that James Clerk
Maxwell was ultimately to describe as one of the most valuable
science-forming ideas.[4]
....
[3] P.Q.R (1842) "On the uniform motion of heat and its connection with the
mathematical theory of electricity" Cambridge Mathematical Journal 3, 71-84
[4] Niven, W.D. (ed.) (1965). The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell,
2 vols. New York: Dover. , Vol.2, p.301
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Thomson,_1st_Baron_Kelvin
Coulomb's law of electrostatics, like Newton's insight into planetary
motions,
is of an inverse square relation, i.e., of APPARENT action at a distance,
but
more accurately it is a net "resultant force", as Maxwell would say.
James Clerk Maxwell:
As I proceeded with the study of Faraday, I perceived that his method of
conceiving the phenomena was also a mathematical one, though not exhibited
in the conventional form of mathematical symbols. I also found that these
methods were capable of being expressed in the ordinary mathematical forms,
and thus compared with those of the professed mathematicians.
For instance, Faraday, in his mind's eye, saw lines of force traversing all
space where the mathematicians saw centres of force attracting at a
distance: Faraday saw a medium where they saw nothing but distance: Faraday
sought the seat of the phenomena in real actions going on in the medium,
they were satisfied that they had found it in a power of action at a
distance impressed on the electric fluids.
When I had translated what I considered to be Faraday's ideas into a
mathematical form, I found that in general the results of the two methods
coincided, so that the same phenomena were accounted for, and the same laws
of action deduced by both methods, but that Faraday's methods resembled
those in which we begin with the whole and arrive at the parts by analysis,
while the ordinary mathematical methods were founded on the principle of
beginning with the parts and building up the whole by synthesis.
I also found that several of the most fertile methods of research discovered
by the mathematicians could be expressed much better in terms of ideas
derived from Faraday than in their original form.
....
Feb. 1, 1873.
~~Preface to *A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I*,
pgs. ix-xiv (1st ed., 1873)
While still a student at Cambridge, Thomson embarked on a comparative study
of the distribution of electrostatic force and the distribution of heat
through a solid that led him to conclude that the two are mathematically
equivalent. This work, published as "On the uniform motion of heat in
homogeneous solid bodies, and its connection with the mathematical theory of
electricity," was the foundation of his later work involving electric and
magnetic fields. Moreover, Thomson's efforts in this area would provide the
groundwork for James Clerk Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, as Maxwell
himself openly admitted.
Thomson's influence on another great scientific mind is notable as well. In
1845, Thomson mathematically analyzed Michael Faraday's magnetic lines of
force and wrote a letter to him in August of that year explaining how his
calculations predicted that magnetic fields should affect the plane of
polarized light. Faraday had many years before experimented with light and
magnetism, but without observing any connection between the two. Encouraged
by Thomson's prediction, Faraday decided to readdress the problem and began
a new series of experiments in his laboratory. By mid-September he had
proven that magnetism and light are related, discovering what has come to be
known as the Faraday effect.
In his later years, Thomson became embroiled in the controversy surrounding
the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin. Basing his calculations on his
understanding of thermodynamics and the work of Fourier, Thomson estimated
the ages of the sun and the Earth, and based on these estimations speculated
that it was impossible for life to evolve over the vast expanses of time
associated with Darwinism.
http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/education/tutorials/pioneers/kelvin.html
I am not smart enought to really understand what I said. I have MESSIAH
on Qunatum Mechaninds and I ADMIRE the words in the book.
I keep trying to understand.
josephus
Physics, or natural philosophy, is actually comprehensible at the conceptual
level to folks like you and me, if you admire the words of diamond truth.
TO PROFESSOR FARADAY.
129 Union Street,
Aberdeen, 9th November 1857.
DEAR SIR-
....
Now the mode of looking at Nature, which belongs to those who can see
the lines of force, deals very little with "resultant forces," but with a
network of lines of action of which these are the final results, so that I,
for my part, can not realise your dissatisfaction with the law of
gravitation, provided you conceive it according to your own principles.
It may seem very different when stated by the believers in "forces at a
distance," but there can be only differences in form and conception, not
in quantity or mechanical effect, between them and those who trace force
by its lines.
But when we face the great questions about gravitation-Does it require
time? Is it polar to the "outside of the universe" or to anything? Has it
any reference to electricity? or does it stand on the very foundation of
matter, mass or inertia? - then we feel the need of tests, whether they be
cornets or nebulae, or laboratory experiments, or bold questions as to the
truth of received opinions.
I have now namely tried to show you why I do not think gravitation a
dangerous subject to apply your methods to, and that it may be possible to
throw light on it also by the embodiment of the same ideas, which are
expressed mathematically in the functions of Laplace and of Sir W. R.
Hamilton in Planetary Theory.
But there are questions relating to the connection between
magneto-electricity and certain mechanical effects which seems to me
opening up quite a new road to the establishment of principles in
electricity, and a possible conformation of the physical nature of
magnetic lines of force. Professor W. Thomson seems to have some
new lights on this subject.
-Yours sincerely,
JAMES CLERK MAXWELL.
~~The Life of, pgs. 336-337 (1882)
Max Planck:
.... at that time, as still today, I held the unshakeable opinion that the
simpler the presentation of a particular law of Nature, the more general
it is ...
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1918/planck-lecture.html
Richard Feynman:
The fact that electrodynamics can be written in so many ways - the
differential equations
of Maxwell, various minimum principles with fields, minimum principles
without fields, all different kinds of ways, was something I knew, but I
have never understood. It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws
of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are
not apparently identical at first, but, with a little mathematical fiddling
you can show the relationship. ... I don't know why this is - it remains a
mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always
another way to say the same thing that doesn't look at all like the way you
said it before. I don't know what the reason for this is. I think it is
somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html
Feynman also understood these things, yet he died persisting in his denial
of the Holy Ghost, which sin is unpardonable.
For, longitudinal light waves do exist, as expected in the Maxwell
mathematics of electrodynamics, which is founded upon Faraday's
concept of lines of force (transmitted via anisotropic aether) and the
Hamiltonian principle of least action, an entire chapter being devoted to
the latter in Vol. II of Maxwell's monumental Treatise on E&M.
See the 2002 article "Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic
waves", co-authored by C. Monstein and J.P. Wesley and published in
Europhysics Letters, 59 (4), pp. 514-520 (2002):
http://saturn.ethz.ch/papers/monstein/7210.pdf
There is more to light than photons, which are of transverse undulations,
saith the Lord, therefore deny not the Holy Ghost and the light thereof.
(11:22 pm on July 25, 2007)
TO THE SAME. [to Faraday]
8 Palace Gardens Terrace,
Kensington, W., 19th Oct. 1861.
DEAR SIR-
....
From the determination by Kohlrausch and Weber of the numerical relation
between the statical and magnetic effects of electricity, I have determined
the elasticity of the medium in air, and assuming that it is the same with
the luminiferous ether, I have determined the velocity of propagation of
transverse vibrations.
The result is 193,088 miles per second (deduced from electrical and
magnetic experiments). Fizean has determined the velocity of light = 193,118
miles per second, by direct experiment.
This coincidence is not merely numerical. I worked out the formulae in
the
country before seeing Weber's number, which is in millimetres, and I think
we have now strong reason to believe, whether my theory is a fact or not,
that the luminiferous and the electromagnetic medium are one.
....
When I began to study electricity mathematically I avoided all the old
traditions about forces acting at a distance, and after reading your papers
as a first step to right thinking, I read the others, interpreting as I went
on, but never allowing myself to explain anything by these forces. It is
because I put off reading about electricity till I could do it without
prejudice that I think I have been able to get hold of some of your ideas,
such as the electrotonic state, action of contiguous parts, etc., and my
chief object in writing to you is to ascertain if I have got the same ideas
which led you to see your way into things, or whether I have no right to
call my notions by your names.-I remain, yours truly,
J. C. MAXWELL.
~~The Life of, pgs. 338-339 (1882)
Michael Faraday:
On a former occasion certain lines about a bar-magnet were described and
defined (being those which are depicted to the eye by the use of iron
filings sprinkled in the neighbourhood of the magnet), and were recommended
as expressing accurately the nature, condition, direction, and amount of the
force in any given region either within or outside of the bar. At that time
the lines were considered in the abstract. Without departing from or
unsettling anything then said, the inquiry is now entered upon of the
possible and probable physical existence of such lines.
~~On the Physical Lines of Magnetic Force,
Royal Institution Proceedings, June 11, 1852
Also published in Faraday's *Experimental Researches in Electricity*
2 The same light which enlighteneth your eyes quickeneth your
understandings, saith the Lord, and is the law by which all things are
governed, and which, saith the Lord, changeth not, but remains constant,
that ye may have a standard by which to judge truth, and which constant is
called the law of light.
3 And it is that science, saith the Lord, which abrogates or does away with
the basis of true science, or, saith the Lord, that which is known as
physics and mathematics, which are my statutes, or the laws by which the
planets as wheel upon their wings in the immensity of space, is it not
false?
4 Even so, O man, it is given unto thee to judge, and it is that by what
judgement ye judge, that shall ye also be judged.
5 For it is given unto thee, O man, to judge between good and evil.
6 And by what shall ye judge?
7 Yea, I say unto thee, O man, that it is the light of Christ, or that which
ye call intelligence.
8 And this light doth not vary, neither is there any shadow of change
according to this law.
9 And it is by this standard that ye perceive the world.
10 For if the light were variable, then ye could not see with thine eyes and
ye would become lost in the world.
11 And so it is with spiritual things, for they are judged also by that same
light.
12 For that light which quickeneth your understandings, giveth you life, for
by this power ye are edified, saith the Lord, that ye may be guided in thy
paths, and live unto me, O man.
13 Therefore that which is eternal, and changeth not, is of me, and that
which is not eternal, but doth vary according to the fashions, and vagaries
and foolishness and generations of man, is of the devil or of man, but not
God, the Eternal I am.
14 And it is, saith the Lord, that the righteous shall be divided from the
wicked, even the sheep even from the goats, according to this law in these
the latter days.
15 For they who believe in change, or evolution as it is known among men,
shall be damned and burned at my coming, while those whose hearts are turned
even unto the Fathers according to the truth, which varies not, shall be
saved upon eternal principles, and obtain heaven which is eternal, and dwell
forever with them, the Fathers, where there is no clash in doctrine, saith
the Lord, for they, even they my Sons, see perfectly, even with the same
mind, and understanding, even eye to eye as it is written when the Lord
shall bring again Zion.
16 Thus the Fathers have been saved according to the same gospel which must
save thee, O man, and upon the same principles which are consistent, which
is the light, even the same light that enlighteneth thy eyes, saith the Most
High God, even the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Art Bulla, whom ye know
not, Yea but I know him, saith the Lord, and have ordained that he shall
bear rule over thee, forever and ever, as mine anointed.
Revelations of Jesus Christ 159:2-16
(Received by the Prophet Art Bulla, Apostle of Jesus Christ,
on July 25, 1989)
~~"Light is the Law by which all Things are Governed, saith the Lord."
.
|
|
| User: "Sanitys Little Helper" |
|
| Title: Re: The monkeys are loose in the library again |
27 Jul 2007 02:25:54 AM |
|
|
"Jong Kim" <rhl71@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:13aj4faomgd08ad@corp.supernews.com to alt.atheism:
Ook!
I fixed your post for you.
--
David Silverman F.L.A.H.N.
aa #2208
"If you are informed by God, you can be misinformed by nobody" - Osama Bin
Laden
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: The monkeys are loose in the library again |
27 Jul 2007 02:56:58 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:25:54 +0200 (CEST), "Sanity's Little Helper"
<elvish@noshpam.org> wrote:
"Jong Kim" <rhl71@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:13aj4faomgd08ad@corp.supernews.com to alt.atheism:
Ook!
I fixed your post for you.
The Orang in question had far more intelligence and perspicacity than
Kim Jong menatlly-Ill will ever have.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Uncertainty Principle |
27 Jul 2007 06:18:35 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:35:57 -0700, Jong Kim wrote:
"josephus" <dogbird@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:b3Ppi.11952$zA4.2716@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
There is the uncertainty principle.
Certainty Principle:
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost<SMACK>
Bad troll!
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism,
because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Mussolini
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
