Forsythe on 9/7/2002 at 22:39
Hrm... true, but then again that story falls into the same trap that Exodus was trying so hard to nudge me into ;) Slang words are real words provided enough speakers know them... they may just not be acknowledged as being official English words. Try telling the Thief forum-goers that 'Taffer' isn't a real word... don't worry, I'll call the paramedics in time ;)
Vilhelm on 10/7/2002 at 00:07
Hmmm.... second time you've encouraged me to do something dangerous. But I am tempted.... :cheeky:
Forsythe on 10/7/2002 at 00:25
*grin* What can I say? Reality TV shows are so bland... and besides, they won't actually kill you, that's unprofesional. Nah, you'll just wake up with a few dozen knots on your head, a headache, and a severe case of double-vision ;)
Exodus_dk on 10/7/2002 at 06:02
Quote:
Originally posted by Forsythe *grin* What can I say? Reality TV shows are so bland... and besides, they won't actually kill you, that's unprofesional. Nah, you'll just wake up with a few dozen knots on your head, a headache, and a severe case of double-vision ;) In that way they don't differ much from drinking... :sweat:
If the real words were the ones appearing in the Webster's dictionary then mostly all languages except english could consider themselves buggered!
The philosophical train of events is usually something like this:
thougt -> word -> action -> reality
Whereas gods and other divine entities can take a shortcut:
thought -> reality
...so you could argue that having just thought up a word makes it real... We are gods after all, right? ;)
Forsythe on 10/7/2002 at 19:31
Quote:
In that way they don't differ much from drinking... :sweat:*grin* True, and speaking of which, have you ever noticed how philosophical you get when you're smashed? (True for me, at any rate) I'll grant that it's not exactly quality philosophising though ;)
Quote:
The philosophical train of events is usually something like this:
thougt -> word -> action -> reality
Whereas gods and other divine entities can take a shortcut:
thought -> reality
Hrm... to properly describe the interrelation between thoughts, actions, words & reality you'd almost have to have a Venn diagram ;) After all, if (pretending the story is real) Sir Isaac Newton saw an apple fall and realised what gravity is all about, that would be reality -> action -> thought , no?
And then of course there's the good ol' uncertainty principle... wherein, knowlege twiddles with reality ;)
Exodus_dk on 10/7/2002 at 22:32
Quote:
Originally posted by Forsythe
*grin* True, and speaking of which, have you ever noticed how philosophical you get when you're smashed? (True for me, at any rate) I'll grant that it's not exactly quality philosophising though ;)Yeah - I have had the same experience... As for drinking and thinking:
"Immanuel Kant was a real piss-ant who was very rarely stable. Heideggar, Heideggar was a boozy beggar who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out-consume Schoppenhauer and Hegel. And Whittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.
There's nothing Nieizsche couldn't teach 'ya 'bout the raising of the wrist. Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.
John Stewart Mill, of his own free will On half a pint of shanty was particularly ill. Plato they say could stick it away, Half a crate of whiskey every day.
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle, And Hobbes was fond of his dram. And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart. 'I drink, therefore I am.'
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed; A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed"
Monty Python - you have my deepest respect!
Quote:
Hrm... to properly describe the interrelation between thoughts, actions, words & reality you'd almost have to have a Venn diagram ;) After all, if (pretending the story is real) Sir Isaac Newton saw an apple fall and realised what gravity is all about, that would be reality -> action -> thought , no?
And then of course there's the good ol' uncertainty principle... wherein, knowlege twiddles with reality ;)
Yeah - ofcourse Newton was also the one to formulate the 3rd law of mechanics: Action equals reaction. So why shouldn't the process of cognition be any different?
And yeah Heisenberg was a real genius... Also the fact that there is a lower limit as to how small phaenomenons we can observe is very interesting, and that it is so for all parameters. Time, length, energy, etc. Though we might never obtain the resolution to make even be able to observe these limitations.
Physics are at first glace rather simple - however when you begin to think about the infinite parameters combining to form reality it becomes impossible to determine anything! It's a funny thing - we have the ultimate tool, the Schrödinger Equation... However we can only find an exact solution to it in very limited circumstances...
I'm looking forward to next semester - I'll have courses in Quantum mechanics, Statistic physics and cryophysics... going to be exciting I think :) But hard nonetheless.Forsythe on 11/7/2002 at 04:26
Quote:
Originally posted by Exodus_dk Monty Python - you have my deepest respect!No foolin', man; word for the wise, btw, never ever pull a 'Whizzo Chocolates' skit for Valentine's Day unless your SO is a die-hard Python fan. *winces at the memory*
Quote:
Physics are at first glace rather simple - however when you begin to think about the infinite parameters combining to form reality it becomes impossible to determine anything! It's a funny thing - we have the ultimate tool, the Schrödinger Equation... However we can only find an exact solution to it in very limited circumstances...
I'm looking forward to next semester - I'll have courses in Quantum mechanics, Statistic physics and cryophysics... going to be exciting I think :) But hard nonetheless. You wouldn't know it from listening to me, but I was a Physics major for 4 yrs. Had to change majors when I got to advanced Quantum though; I can rule-of-thumb equations that return numbers, but how do you rule-of-thumb it when all you get back is another equation? :confused:
Kilana on 11/7/2002 at 04:37
Aaaahhhh!!!... too many words, no plot line... this must be...
a smart persons conversation.... aaaahhh... can't understand, don't want to read all...
*starts twiddling her thumbs mumbling something about trees*
Exodus_dk on 11/7/2002 at 06:12
Quote:
Originally posted by Forsythe
No foolin', man; word for the wise, btw, never ever pull a 'Whizzo Chocolates' skit for Valentine's Day unless your SO is a die-hard Python fan. *winces at the memory*LOL - I like the live show version :laff: Terry Gilliam REWLS!
However - have no fear I don't do Valentine's day... Any other day of the year - but never Valentine's Day! I find it horrifying that such a day actually exists! What I mean is - showing that you care for and loves your girlfriend shouldn't be made something that you are meant to do on a certain day... If you need a tradition for such things - sorry no offense intended - you're an insensitive prick!
Quote:
You wouldn't know it from listening to me, but I was a Physics major for 4 yrs. Had to change majors when I got to advanced Quantum though; I can rule-of-thumb equations that return numbers, but how do you rule-of-thumb it when all you get back is another equation? :confused:
Yeah - I know what you mean... I sure am glad I purchased a Texas Instruments Ti-89. It is capable of symbolic integration, differentiation and linear algebra! ROXX! Never wanna twist my head on some silly integral! Not that I couldn't but it sure takes longer...
A shame you changed major though :tsktsk: Though I find advanced software programming unfathomable!Striker on 11/7/2002 at 07:35
There is no 'Rule of thumb' when you get to that point. Hard work and understanding is the only way. After that, Several variable calculus et al. are difficult, but do-able. I should know, I have a mathematics and computer science double major!
-Striker <- High priest of Geekdom. ;)
