Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger <frgn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 05:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
New ideas have always been hated and their
authors pestered by the Panu Petteri Höglunds
of their time so one may say that if you propose
an idea but have no Panu Petteri Höglund running
around you yelping at you biting your trouseres
peeing on your shoes your idea can't be really
new and innovative.
(writing this because my online stalker Panu
Petteri Höglund has been seized by one more
killrating frenzy)
On Aug 18, 1:21 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:33 pm, Pat <jpk...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 17, 8:04 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My thought of this weekend: What if the present
is of a fractal structure, enfolding past and future?
Language certainly contains both it's past and
future, and both in fractal ways.
Where could I get some of what you've been smoking?
That's an old Usenet joke that has grown
a long beard. (Beard, by the way, is yet
another derivative of Magdalenian BIR.)
Do you smoke "funny things"? (quoting
Kid Rock). If you care about my advice:
love and science are better than drugs.
Now for my weekend thought. The Roman
Empire once ruled most of Europe. Where
is it now? We have Roman ruins, artefacts
in the ground, the Lex Romana at the
foundation of western law, and Latin words
in western languages. All in all the once
powerful Roman Empire has a fractal
presence in our time, and the same is true
of every past. What about the future? it will
develop and evolve from parts of our present
and in that sense has also a fractal presence
in our time. If we remove the fractal past
and the fractal future from the present, also
our actual present is of a fractal nature ...
Over the weekend I read a book about time:
Michael Lockwood, The Labyrinth of Time,
Introducing the Universe, Oxford University
Press, first published in 2005. Fractals are
not mentioned in the book. For example
Minkoswkian space-time is locally Euclidian,
as a tiny part of the surface of a saucer is
practically flat. Yet if you look really close
at a tiny part of the surface, it gets ragged,
namely on the scale of molecules and nuclei
and particles, and fractal geometry would be
more appropriate. Also the surface of the
light-cone can't be real smooth, for light -
as Richard P. Feynman showed - moves
at every speed, also backward in time,
and follows every path, also zigzag lines,
also performing loops, also writing the Bible
en passant, and in every language. Only
the average speed equals about 186,287
miles or nearly 300,000 km a second, and
only the sum total of all pathways results
in a geodesic line in space-time. And so on.
All we ever know is the here and now, but
our present is of a fractal nature, containing
an enrolled fractal past and future. I like this
thought, and formulated it for my future
readers, as I don't write - you may now this -
for the present members of sci.lang. Seems
to be a contradiction. But think about it. As
the future is enrolled in the present, though
in fractal form, I can well write for future
readers, and maintain kind of a dialogue
with thinkers of the past ...
You see? science is better than drugs,
mind-boggling and great fun. There is only
one thing better than science. You know
what I mean. I told you above.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Craoibhin66
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Craoibhin66
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- References:
- proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: analyst41
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Pat
- Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- From: Franz Gnaedinger
- proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Prev by Date: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Next by Date: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Previous by thread: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Next by thread: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|