On Friday, November 1, 2013 4:20:45 PM UTC-4, JohnM wrote: > > liz wrote (Oct. 24) to Craig: > *What are inorganic atoms? Or rather (since I suspect all atoms are > inorganic), what are organic atoms?* > * > * > What are 'atoms'? > (IMO models of our ignorance (oops: knowledge) about a portion of the > unknowable infinite explained during the latest some centuries of human > development 'science'. > JM > > I agree that atomic theory is not automatically a description of 'what is', but I would say that an atom represents the smallest body part, or the smallest sense organ that can be detected (indirectly) by our public facing sense organs.
Beneath that level of scale, I propose that the organs and bodies themselves no longer cohere to our inspection, and are revealed increasingly to adhere within the inspection itself. This adhesion vs cohesion ratio begins to be seen at the atomic level, as 'electrons' represent interatomic adhesion rather than cohesive bodies/shells/orbitals. Molecules are only made of atoms in the sense that words are spelled with letters. The molecular word-ness is not only an emergent property of the letters (it is that also, as syllables are atoms of words and letters are atoms of syllables), but the meaning of the world is not emergent, it is divergent, from the top-down. The sense of the word can also be seen to radiate (figuratively) from the center-out. Atoms build molecules, cells build molecules, and molecular expression is fulfilled as both cellular activity and atomic activity. It all fits together (because it is all divergent from pansensitivity (*another neologism that I might like = holosemiotics). Does that sound conceivable? Craig > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:46 PM, LizR <liz...@gmail.com <javascript:>>wrote: > >> On 25 October 2013 14:31, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> >>> Looking at natural presences, like atoms or galaxies, the scope of their >>> persistence is well beyond any human relation so they do deserve the >>> benefit of the doubt. We have no reason to believe that they were assembled >>> by anything other than themselves. The fact that we are made of atoms and >>> atoms are made from stars is another point in their favor, whereas no >>> living organism that we have encountered is made of inorganic atoms, or of >>> pure mathematics, or can survive by consuming only inorganic atoms or >>> mathematics. >>> >> >> What are inorganic atoms? Or rather (since I suspect all atoms are >> inorganic), what are organic atoms? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
