--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > This goes to the Shrodinger cat thought experiment. ie. "Is > > the > > > > cat > > > > > > in the box dead or alive if no-one else sees it. It is > > > therefore > > > > in > > > > > > a neither dead nor alive state" > > > > > > This thought experiment is nonsense because it assumes only > > > > hhigher > > > > > > order animals (people) are observers, but all animals (and > > > > beyond ) > > > > > > are observers, including the flees in the cats skin, and > > even > > > > the > > > > > > parasites in its blood, it's very own cells as single > celled > > > > > > organisms, and its very own DNA. > > > > > > Someone is always watching.....everywhere. > > > > > > Even a planet is observing (experiencing) as is the sun. > > > > > > The fallacy of Shrodinger's cat is as yet not known to the > > > > > > scientific understanding on Earth > > > > > > > > > > Well, boy, you're right in line for a Nobel Prize, > > > > > then, as soon as you make it known.>>> > > > > > > > > Now you are simply being dumb. When you can't handle it you > > decide > > > > to throw sarcastic insults. I know you can do better than > that . > > > > > > Hey, the reason the fallacy, as you describe it, > > > isn't yet known to scientific understanding is > > > because nobody's come up with any *evidence* for > > > it. > > > > > > I don't have any particular affection for > > > Schroedinger's cat. I'd be delighted if someone > > > could show it was a fallacy. I'd be thrilled if > > > celestial bodies could be shown to have > > > consciousness. I had a revelatory experience once > > > of becoming aware of the sun as a conscious being.>>. > > > > You are really not thinking this through. You are simply reacting > > to your tribal urges. Good luck with that. > > Unfortunately, you won't be able to show me where > I've gone so wrong in my thinking.>>>
By what logic can you say the sun is not a conscious being? ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
