🚀 go-pugleaf

jo10bi12@aol.com (Jo10bi12) wrote in message
news:<20011129212504.09871.00000002@mb-cu.aol.com>...

> If you state that there are no absolutes 
> - you have just stated  an absolute!  
> The universe is in face 
> built around absolutes.  If there was no
> limit to the size of the universe, 
> it would be much much colder then -273.16
> degrees centegrade, etc., etc..
> 
>   Regards, John

Dear John, no I am not thinking of breaking up with you;
rather... THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES IN THE UNIVERSE, NONE. And 
all temperatures are measured with relativistic thermometers,
while all sizes are measures with relativistic rulers BECAUSE
our universe is imploding faster than the speed of light, and
therefore NOTHING IN IT can retain an absolute perspective...
neither thermometers, rulers, nor wieners, for that matter.

What it all boils down to, dear John, is that you have to learn 
to differentiate between "sounds in the mind" which might mean
something to you, and something else entirely to someone else,
and real objects which have an existence in the universe which
does not require "your" brain to exist in order for them to exist.
Now do you understand? [This, unfortunately, is for most highest-
evolved simians... still merely a rhetorical question.]

Here follows the dissection of this silly "absolute" paradox
of yours: THERE ARE NO PARADOXES IN NATURE (that's "inside the 
universe"), ONLY IN THE MIND. Without a doubt, the human mind 
is putrid with endless paradoxes, some capable of being worked
through even by semi-intelligent simians, others never to escape 
from the confines of padded rooms. However, my statement was: 

    "There are no absolutes in the universe. None."

Please read it again (and again for some of you), and you will
discover that it is impossible to agree with the statement AND
believe the statement is an absolute. Paradox? No. I will repeat:
"There are no paradoxes in nature, only in the human mind" (that's
the ONLY "place" in which a thought can exist, in case you hadn't
noticed... and -please- understand what a thought is):

It is no different than the case with another thought... in which
the thinker encompasses the entire universe with his thought. But, 
how can a "thought" encompass the entire universe... isn't that 
"thought" INSIDE the universe?... A paradox IN the universe? Nope. 
Sorry: "There are no paradoxes in nature, only in the human mind."

In the end, the nature of all thoughts is purely representational
and abstract: It's "whatever meaning" we choose to attach to sounds
such as, "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious," after all. The "thing"
that exists IN the universe is the infinitesimal traces of chemicals
in the brain, and the little gray cells playing Ping-Pong with them
... and how on earth such meaningless mounds of trace elements and
flesh/blood amount to an "absolute" in the universe is beyond meaning.

Ergo: People who believe that my "thought" above (about there being no
absolutes in the universe--none) is itself an absolute which disproves
the law it states... are hopeless schmegheads. [But it is a marvelous 
test for friends/family who have not yet been told this is the case 
to be tested as to whether they are hopeless schmegheads or not... so 
try it on a few of your people and--at last--find out WHOM YOU ARE by 
discovering "whom you're with!" I predict you will be disappointed.]

The sad truth is that "thoughts" don't have any real existence, that's
why all our thoughts can be fantasies and, all of them, entirely and
completely wrong, and not a single one of them bearing any relationship 
whatsoever with/to reality. But, of course, if you're smart: that's 
the fun part, isn't it! *

S D Rodrian
poems.sdrodrian.com
physics.sdrodrian.com

* And now you know why there are so many Muslims and other Satanists in
the world.





"Eutopian" <eutopian2000@rogers.com> wrote in message news:<k%aO7.14004$2Fd.9688@news1.bloor.is>...
> Are you not proving in your debate of "there are no absolutes in
> the universe" is false? Think about it, you are going on and on about why an
> abosolute is or not an absolute explanation of itself, and in the same range
> of description, you are proving this debate is not an absolute. In the
> absence of an answer the two sides go on and on, so goes my philosophy of
> infinite being a simple paradox.
> 
> 
> "S D Rodrian" <sdr@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> news:bf7b874e.0111290450.33fd9d97@posting.google.com...
> > KenM <kjmalla@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:<3C05DD14.3C8A724A@yahoo.com>...
> >
> > > S D Rodrian wrote:
>  
> > >> There are NO absolutes inside the universe: None.
>  
> > >>> Isn't that an absolute? Prove that there are no absolutes in
> > >>> the universe.
>  
> > >> I don't have to, you little trickster, you: You ALREADY KNOW
> > >> IT IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE (and are only asking me to prove to you
> > >> something you already know is already proved because you are
> > >> such an obvious smarty-pants, already).
>  
> > >> What'd'ya think, I was born yesterday?!?! Baby, when you
> > >> were setting out... that was me already coming back:
> >
> >    Helloooo!
> >
> > >> I'm wise to you, you know! Sorry, but you KNOW for a fact
> > >> that THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES IN THE UNIVERSE--Otherwise you
> > >> wouldn't be SO damn ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN my statement above
> > >> could NOT be a provable absolute... that you felt confident
> > >> enough to challenge me as boldly and perilously as you did!
>  
> > >> Proved enough?... or shall I send in the clowns now?
> >
> > Wow! Didn't have to... They're coming in on their own (toy cars):
> >
> > > He who asserts must prove. You asserted there are no absolutes in the
> > > universe. So prove it.
> >
> > Obviously my reply went way over your head: Look up!
> >
> > Prove what?... What everybody already accepts as proved?!?!?!
> >
> > Those who say that the statement "there are no absolutes in
> > the universe" is an absolute, are agreeing with it (contending
> > as they are implicitly doing that "that absolute" cannot possibly    [sic]
> > exist in the universe, while dragging in all the other absolutes
> > in the universe into their contention). While those who agree
> > with it, obviously have better ways to waste their lives and want
> > to go on to the important things in such lives, already, like TV.
> >
> > For the rest of us, however: IF anybody disputed the fact that
> > the statement "there are no absolutes in the universe" is NOT an
> > absolute... they would be agreeing that it is so true a statement
> > that it even includes its opposite (what? that there ARE absolutes
> > there?!... which is what he/she would be agreeing with in their
> > obvious disagreement... or, that the statement IS an absolute--which
> > is what it says it cannot be). So: Its proof would be self-evident.
> >
> > [What the hell is there to prove when you already understand the
> > statement is not an absolute?!?! This is your clue to leave the Hall
> > ... along with sanity. And if you happen to find a red whistle with
> > the portrait of a beagle: there's a nickle reward waiting for the finder.]
> > Otherwise, if you agree with it: You should be ashamed of yourself, for
> > you would be agreeing that indeed there are no absolutes in the universe
> > ... so again I ask you: Proving what "absolute" are we talking about?
> > Think about it for as long as you need to... nobody's pushing you...
> > there are no brinks or cliffs on the horizon (only dark clouds).
> >
> > In this case... the fact that the statement "there are no absolutes
> > in the universe" can not possibly be an absolute IS the very proof
> > you are requesting of there being no absolutes in the universe, you see?
> >
> > Kindly leading the blind,
> >
> > S D Rodrian
> > Ringmaster of The Theater of The World is A Funny Place.
> >
> > > Write a paper...create a website!!!! Invent an inflationary dark matter
> > > red shifted cosmic radiated blob to help prove your point! Why not?
> > > Everybody does it!!!!
> > >
> > > -k
> >
> > Been there, done that:
> >
> > http://poems.sdrodrian.com
> > http://physics.sdrodrian.com