Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 03/11/05
- Next message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:12:51 GMT
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:40:31 -0500, "robert j. kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.net> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>Albert Wagner wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'll leave this unsupported assertion for Lester to handle. I'm sure
>> that he will enjoy it.
>
>Whatever it is it has nothing to do with multiples of Dirac's constant
>(Planck Constant/2*Pi). Lester does not know the difference between
>velocity and angular momemntum. You and he are a matched pair, both
>ignorant of physics.
Well it's a simple question, Bob, plainly stated. No need for evasive
condescension. You're all over the place trying to pretend the idea
isn't straightforward enough even for you.
Regards - Lester
- Next message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|