Re: What does this have to do with electronics?
From: Rich Grise (null_at_example.net)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: Winfield Hill : "Re: Review: The Incredible Secret Money Machine II, Lancaster"
- Previous message: Winfield Hill : "Re: OPA657 50Mhz photodiode preamplifier problems"
- In reply to: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:57:12 GMT
On Sunday 12 September 2004 02:19 am, John Woodgate did deign to grace us
with the following:
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Kevin Aylward
> <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote (in <WFT0d.22661$F73.3169@fe2.news.bl
> ueyonder.co.uk>) about 'What does this have to do with electronics?', on
> Sun, 12 Sep 2004:
>
> Some rude person wrote:
>
>>> I keep trying to tell you, Aylward, that just because you don't
>>> believe in something, doesn't make it not so.
>>>
>>
>>I keep trying to tell you, lack of proof that there is not something
>>else out there, is no basis to form a conjecture that there is.
>
> I think that's too hard. I think it's not unreasonable to base a
> *conjecture* (no more) on a lack of satisfaction with an explanation.
> There are several precedents; Mendeleev's conjecture of the Periodic
> Table, being not satisfied with Newlands' Law of Octaves, general
> dissatisfaction with the proliferation of sub-atomic particles, leading
> to the 'quark' conjecture (as it then was).
>
> What is NOT sensible is to base anything MORE than a conjecture, i.e. a
> hypothesis and especially not a theory, on mere dissatisfaction. A
> hypothesis has to be testable to be come a theory, and a theory has to
> predict further falsifiable results.
>
Here's an experiment:
Read this, and feel how you react to it. Be honest with yourself:
http://www.kornax.com/Right_Use_of_Will_Excerpt.htm
Please report back with your experience(s).
(my hypothesis is that it's true, and my life has been my laboratory
for about 15 or so years, and so far, it's working.)
Thanks,
Rich
- Next message: Winfield Hill : "Re: Review: The Incredible Secret Money Machine II, Lancaster"
- Previous message: Winfield Hill : "Re: OPA657 50Mhz photodiode preamplifier problems"
- In reply to: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Next in thread: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Reply: John Woodgate: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
