[MD] Quantum computing

[Ron Kulp]

 [Case]
I guess the difference would be whether you want to know was is "really"
going on or whether you just want a sense of personal satisfaction. By
the time science "eventually" figures something out it is too hard for
us regular folks to figure out anyway. I tend to rely heavily on my own
subject understandings regardless of what mode of thinking I employ so
it's pretty much a wash from that standpoint. Since discoveries in
modern science paint a truly bizarre and fascinating world view, I tend
to regard religio-mystic-philosophical thinking as just lazy. You know
kinda logical but with no math and no actual facts to 
get in the way.
 
[x]
seems it's about how close you hang to the frontier of rational thought,
I'm with you, I'd rather strike 
a match than curse the darkness, I just hesitate at totally dismissing
possibities on the grounds that they 
Do not fit in with the percieved convention of the time. What "really is
goin on" stops dead in the middle of
The  four lane highway of science scratchin it's head, it's at this
point in the road where this problem
Of o.k., do we wait, accept where we're at or project, (no matter how
ludicris). I think laziness was
2 or three exits back, I would like to give Platt and Ham at least that
much credit. 

Tight leather might increase blood pressure in the brain like a g-suit
allowing for increased accuracy
Plus all the baddies are distracted, with this in mind, maybe the
swedish bikini team would be better at mopping
Up the insurgencey, sure be nicer to watch on CNN.


-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Case
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:37 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Quantum computing

[x]
When you get to a scientific point of objective reality as fluctuating
patterns of energy, it certainly leaves a wee bit of room for stuff like
that, you really can't rule it out absolutely. You can "believe" science
wil "eventually" Figure this out too or go "mystic" or "religous"
everything goes to a subjective interpretation from there.
That's why I kinda abandoned scientific method for now and I am focusing
on interpretation and meaning to arrive at accuracy.

[Case]
I guess the difference would be whether you want to know was is "really"
going on or whether you just want a sense of personal satisfaction. By
the time science "eventually" figures something out it is too hard for
us regular folks to figure out anyway. I tend to rely heavily on my own
subject understandings regardless of what mode of thinking I employ so
it's pretty much a wash from that standpoint. Since discoveries in
modern science paint a truly bizarre and fascinating world view, I tend
to regard religio-mystic-philosophical thinking as just lazy. You know
kinda logical but with no math and no actual facts to get in the way. 

[x]
Silver is up these days, be one expensive hobby to hunt werewolves now,
a holy water supersoaker would Be a cheap way to kick some ass though.

[Case]
Or you could make bullets with silver nitrate or phosphorescent goo
inside depending on your target. Tight black leather seems to improve
the aim. But for common household poltergeist and domestic demon
infestation the supersoaker is the way to go.

moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/