| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"Akira Bergman" |
| Date: |
19 Sep 2006 06:32:10 PM |
| Object: |
Nothingness ain't nothing |
Nothingness is the point of contact. It is the seperation and the first
boundary.
,
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics, water for taste, air for
smell, space-time for action, dx for calculus. This is an unpolarised
state. Like hermaphrodites before sex evolved. They are still around.
Nature does not like sameness. Like in quantum mechanics, two particles
in the same quantum state are not allowed. Therefore there would always
have been slight differenciation in the reproductive techniques of a
hermaphrodite population. Difference make a population as much as
similarity. 0 in math indicates that idealisation of very small
quantities by a trancendental concept is useful and it works. We treat
space as nothing in most cases, but we know that it is an entity. This
state corresponds to Grey color.
Then comes another point of differentiation. This time we get a
boundary by polarisation.
{,}
A boundary has at least 2 elements which reflect each other. Like
{-1,0,+1}, {+Charge,Light,-Charge}, {Male,Hermaphrodite,Female},
{Black,Grey,White}, {No,Maybe,Yes}. Then comes a rule;
{,}={}
That is, sameness is not allowed in a set. Or rather, the seperator is
negligible. Polarisation wins out. And we get our empty container to
fill with content. And the story of Nothingness goes on...
http://a-theory-of-nothingness.blogspot.com/
AB
.
|
|
| User: "gibbs" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
19 Sep 2006 06:54:17 PM |
|
|
"Akira Bergman" <akirab@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Nothingness is the point of contact. It is the seperation and the first
boundary.
,
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics, water for taste, air for
smell, space-time for action, dx for calculus. This is an unpolarised
state. Like hermaphrodites before sex evolved. They are still around.
Nature does not like sameness. Like in quantum mechanics, two particles
in the same quantum state are not allowed. Therefore there would always
have been slight differenciation in the reproductive techniques of a
hermaphrodite population. Difference make a population as much as
similarity. 0 in math indicates that idealisation of very small
quantities by a trancendental concept is useful and it works. We treat
space as nothing in most cases, but we know that it is an entity. This
state corresponds to Grey color.
Then comes another point of differentiation. This time we get a
boundary by polarisation.
{,}
A boundary has at least 2 elements which reflect each other. Like
{-1,0,+1}, {+Charge,Light,-Charge}, {Male,Hermaphrodite,Female},
{Black,Grey,White}, {No,Maybe,Yes}. Then comes a rule;
{,}={}
That is, sameness is not allowed in a set. Or rather, the seperator is
negligible. Polarisation wins out. And we get our empty container to
fill with content. And the story of Nothingness goes on...
Yes, I remember my first acid trip!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Akira Bergman" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
19 Sep 2006 09:24:11 PM |
|
|
Tell me more. Never tried.
Is that what you owe your charm to?
Yes, I remember my first acid trip!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "liezard" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 10:59:10 PM |
|
|
gibbs wrote:
"Akira Bergman" <akirab@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Nothingness is the point of contact. It is the seperation and the first
boundary.
,
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics, water for taste, air for
smell, space-time for action, dx for calculus. This is an unpolarised
state. Like hermaphrodites before sex evolved. They are still around.
Nature does not like sameness. Like in quantum mechanics, two particles
in the same quantum state are not allowed. Therefore there would always
have been slight differenciation in the reproductive techniques of a
hermaphrodite population. Difference make a population as much as
similarity. 0 in math indicates that idealisation of very small
quantities by a trancendental concept is useful and it works. We treat
space as nothing in most cases, but we know that it is an entity. This
state corresponds to Grey color.
Then comes another point of differentiation. This time we get a
boundary by polarisation.
{,}
A boundary has at least 2 elements which reflect each other. Like
{-1,0,+1}, {+Charge,Light,-Charge}, {Male,Hermaphrodite,Female},
{Black,Grey,White}, {No,Maybe,Yes}. Then comes a rule;
{,}={}
That is, sameness is not allowed in a set. Or rather, the seperator is
negligible. Polarisation wins out. And we get our empty container to
fill with content. And the story of Nothingness goes on...
Yes, I remember my first acid trip!
dang, you experience no thing on your first acid trip.
do you know how rare that is?
I didn't start to experience no thing till about my 10th or so trip,
maybe as far as 20th trip.
lots of people have taken acid hundreds of times and they still haven't
experienced no thing
then again, no thing is just nothing
just forget about what i said, it was nothing
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 02:37:27 AM |
|
|
"Akira Bergman" <akirab@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Nothingness is the point of contact. It is the seperation and the first
boundary.
,
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics, water for taste, air for
smell, space-time for action, dx for calculus. This is an unpolarised
state. Like hermaphrodites before sex evolved. They are still around.
Nature does not like sameness. Like in quantum mechanics, two particles
in the same quantum state are not allowed. Therefore there would always
have been slight differenciation in the reproductive techniques of a
hermaphrodite population. Difference make a population as much as
similarity. 0 in math indicates that idealisation of very small
quantities by a trancendental concept is useful and it works. We treat
space as nothing in most cases, but we know that it is an entity. This
state corresponds to Grey color.
Congratulations on your blog.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BernardZ" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 03:36:49 AM |
|
|
In article <1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
akirab@tpg.com.au says...
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics,
0 is not nothingness in mathematics. Often 0 is an answer in mathematics
where as nothingness is often no possible answer.
--
The people that believe that the world is flat are proof that heaps of
time, huge amounts of scientific evidence, plenty of eyewitness
accounts, numerous experts opinion and mountains of photographs are not
enough to convince some people! What is particularly frustrating is
that there are many such people on the Usenet.
Observations of Bernard - No 104
.
|
|
|
| User: "Akira Bergman" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 04:13:53 AM |
|
|
BernardZ wrote:
In article <1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
akirab@tpg.com.au says...
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics,
0 is not nothingness in mathematics. Often 0 is an answer in mathematics
where as nothingness is often no possible answer.
The primary context in math is quantity. Therefore 0 (or epsilon, the
infinitesimal) is nothingness. When there is no possible answer in a
problem, then the context is not quantity. Think of nothingness as an
empty container, like a register in computer CPU. When there is nothing
loaded it is 0, that is the container itself. This distinction is
important since it has led to counting and calculating.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bernardz" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 05:56:18 PM |
|
|
Akira Bergman wrote:
BernardZ wrote:
In article <1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
akirab@tpg.com.au says...
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics,
0 is not nothingness in mathematics. Often 0 is an answer in mathematics
where as nothingness is often no possible answer.
The primary context in math is quantity. Therefore 0 (or epsilon, the
infinitesimal) is nothingness.
An infinitesimal is not 0.
0 < dx
infinity x 0 = 0
infinity x dx can sometimes equal something.
When there is no possible answer in a
problem, then the context is not quantity.
Think of nothingness as an
empty container, like a register in computer CPU. When there is nothing
loaded it is 0, that is the container itself. This distinction is
important since it has led to counting and calculating.
What I think you have shown is that we need a definition of nothingness.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Akira Bergman" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothingness ain't nothing |
20 Sep 2006 06:25:06 PM |
|
|
bernardz wrote:
Akira Bergman wrote:
BernardZ wrote:
In article <1158708730.866698.170770@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
akirab@tpg.com.au says...
It is 0 (or rather epsilon) for mathematics,
0 is not nothingness in mathematics. Often 0 is an answer in mathematics
where as nothingness is often no possible answer.
The primary context in math is quantity. Therefore 0 (or epsilon, the
infinitesimal) is nothingness.
An infinitesimal is not 0.
Yes. 0 is a limit case. Yet epsilon is not permitted to be 0.
0 < dx
infinity x 0 = 0
infinity x dx can sometimes equal something.
When there is no possible answer in a
problem, then the context is not quantity.
Think of nothingness as an
empty container, like a register in computer CPU. When there is nothing
loaded it is 0, that is the container itself. This distinction is
important since it has led to counting and calculating.
What I think you have shown is that we need a definition of nothingness.
It seems so. It is a work in progress. There is a strong connection to
quantisation and uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics. Which are
the foundations of QM.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
