enorbet2 Posted July 27, 2009 Report Posted July 27, 2009 nothing cubed.... isn't even a square Quote
Turtle Posted July 28, 2009 Report Posted July 28, 2009 To write, read, talk about Nothing, or to believe in it, or to claim, as Socrates did, to know nothing, is to sit close to the obvious possibility that one is involved in the ultimate unreality of signifying not Nothing but no thing. br Quote
Pyrotex Posted July 28, 2009 Report Posted July 28, 2009 Sir, I have the sample in the analyzer.-What sample?The sample of Nothing.-Excellent. How much Nothing?Precisely 7 nanoos of Nothing.-You can fit 7 nanoos of Nothing into a cubic nillimeter?Yes sir. We're using the new null-dimensional compactor.-Under what nopressure?About 200 nadas per square nillimeter.-Good. What's the first test?The naser. We'll shine a beam of collimated naser night through the Nothing.-Is that the new null frequency naser?Yes sir. The wavelength approaches infinity as the pulse time approaches zero.-Well, let there be night!Okay. Countdown in... 3, 2, 1, fire!-Wow! I didn't see a thing!Yes sir. You can only see night if the nonenergy levels are nil.-What levels are you using here?512 nergs per square nanonillimeter per nanonanonecond.-We can measure notime to that accuracy?Yes sir. With this calibrated nopwatch. See the necond hand?-Wow. That's pretty small all right. So what results did we get?The naser beam indicates zero mass to 18 nigits of accuracy.-Are you sure?Absolutely sir. There's no doubt. And zero nagmetic field.-Well, we expected that. What about the nectric field?Hard to judge sir. It's as if there's Nothing there.-Nothing there? This is gonna be hard to explain to the board.I know sir. But there is more bad news.-Are you sure I want to hear this?The naser night shows a positive zilch factor.-Which means?You take the number of nanoos of Nothing and subtract zilch.-Okay. I subtract zilch. So what?There's Nothing left, sir.-Oh ****... NEXT DougF and DFINITLYDISTRUBD 2 Quote
Turtle Posted August 25, 2009 Report Posted August 25, 2009 In Bohm’s conception of order, then, primacy is given to the undivided whole, and the implicate order inherent within the whole, rather than to parts of the whole, such as particles, quantum states, and continua. For Bohm, the whole encompasses all things, structures, abstractions and processes, including processes that result in (relatively) stable structures as well as those that involve metamorphosis of structures or things. In this view, parts may be entities normally regarded as physical, such as atoms or subatomic particles, but they may also be abstract entities, such as quantum states. Whatever their nature and character, according to Bohm, these parts are considered in terms of the whole, and in such terms, they constitute relatively autonomous and independent "sub-totalities". The implication of the view is, therefore, that nothing is entirely separate or autonomous. Implicate and Explicate Order according to David Bohm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Quote
RCP/CRT/RRT Posted August 26, 2009 Report Posted August 26, 2009 When All Answers are Possible, Any Answer is Meaningless... Quote
freeztar Posted August 26, 2009 Report Posted August 26, 2009 When All Answers are Possible, Any Answer is Meaningless... What if the answer is nothing? Quote
RCP/CRT/RRT Posted August 26, 2009 Report Posted August 26, 2009 What if the answer is nothing?Is that the only possible answer? Quote
freeztar Posted August 26, 2009 Report Posted August 26, 2009 Is that the only answer? It depends on the question, but for the purposes of this thread, yes. :shrug: Quote
Boerseun Posted August 27, 2009 Report Posted August 27, 2009 OP: "How long can we keep a thread about nothing alive?"Â Boerseun: "This long." Quote
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted August 27, 2009 Report Posted August 27, 2009 and then some;) nudge nudge wink wink Quote
Buffy Posted August 28, 2009 Report Posted August 28, 2009 ...we just proceed in a never-ending attempt to verify Zeno's Paradox... The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it, Buffy Quote
Turtle Posted August 28, 2009 Report Posted August 28, 2009 nothing that zeno says is trustworthy. after all, he lied about that incident with the ewe when he claimed that he mistook her for a ram. The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same. ~ Stendhal ~  :hyper: Quote
RCP/CRT/RRT Posted August 28, 2009 Report Posted August 28, 2009 It depends on the question, but for the purposes of this thread, yes. ;)Â Then, I suppose, 'nothing' has meaning... Hah! Awww, you got me :naughty: Quote
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted August 28, 2009 Report Posted August 28, 2009 pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick flick repeat pick... ... ... Hmmmmmmmmmmm... ... Ummmmmmmmmmm... ... Ooooooh... Nuthin left:( Wups wait a min...there's still ol lefty:hihi: Quote
freeztar Posted August 29, 2009 Report Posted August 29, 2009 Then, I suppose, 'nothing' has meaning... Hah! Awww, you got me  Logic means noth ing here. For instance, "pick flick repeat" means nothing unless you're playing a stringed instrument.Some would say that . Or it could be a symptom of nothing on the tv. :eek2: Quote
RCP/CRT/RRT Posted August 29, 2009 Report Posted August 29, 2009 Logic means noth ing here.Hmmm...For instance, "pick flick repeat" means nothing unless you're playing a stringed instrument.Or picking your nose...Some would say that .I prefer the album version Or it could be a symptom of nothing on the tv. :eek2:The Office, Seinfeld, or Family Guy? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.