Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits

From: Bilge (dubious_at_radioactivex.lebesque-al.net)
Date: 10/01/04 

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 10:19:02 -0000

 mountain man:
>"Bilge" <dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net> wrote in message
>news:slrncll87v.1cq.dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net...
>> mountain man:
>> >
>> >"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message
>> >news:2rujc0F1fbj0oU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> >
>> >> Technology driven physics has gotten us within 15 orders of magnitude
>> >> of
>> >> the Planck Length. Classical physics (more to your liking) got us
>> >> nowhere
>> >> that close to The Bottom of Things.
>> >
>> >Classical physics is far too modern for my liking.
>> >
>> >There was a time, not too many centuries back, when everything
>> >might have been given explanation by reference to the elements
>> >of nature, the ancient elements of earth, water, air and fire. These
>> >are the elements of life, and since they have been replaced by the
>> >concepts of solid, liquid, gas and plasma, technology has sold
>> >alot of internal combustion engines, and data processing engines.
>>
>> Then I would suggest simply adopting those things as science and
>> moving on to other things, rather than trying to convince people
>> who want a more fundanental explanation than you seem to want, to
>> go along with you.
>
>
>These simple elements of nature cannot generate technology.
 
  So what? You don't care about that anyway (apart from whatever
you need to post your uninformed diatribes).

>Most people want to see technological benefits.

  So? That isn't your problem. You have your air, earth, fire
and water theory, so go off somewhere and be ecstatic.

>These things
>are about the basic foundation of physical human survival.
>IMO this takes priority over technology, for without life there
>will be no intellectualisation of physics.
 
  Well, you certainly aren't doing much to intellectualize
physics with yours, so why do you care?

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits
    ... >These simple elements of nature cannot generate technology. ... You don't care about that anyway (apart from whatever ... >will be no intellectualisation of physics. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Eotvos, lay description?
    ... >> You have no fucking imagination. ... technology will bring us down to our knees. ... Baez's "This Week in Mathematical Physics" posts and you'll see what I ... Fuck that chicken ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > as a 'fuel' has serious physical limitation." ... > the technology, and to what extent, because the physics was well understood. ... You can say the orbital mechanics was well understood. ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > as a 'fuel' has serious physical limitation." ... > the technology, and to what extent, because the physics was well understood. ... You can say the orbital mechanics was well understood. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Howlers (was Suggestion for hard SF short submission?)
    ... technology not ridiculous enough to make someone who's taken high ... I've taught both high school and university physics, ... since he doesn't want to go along with him back to the Two Worlds. ... FTL flight based on some ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)