tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1228648840567624890.post4621660335550484475..comments2023-02-08T03:16:24.937-05:00Comments on Saturday Morning @ The Story-of- Everything Place: The Trouble With MatterJohn Kotrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02471048328678222796noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1228648840567624890.post-48136340544496141632007-09-18T10:30:00.000-04:002007-09-18T10:30:00.000-04:00Here's something from Loren Eiseley's "The Immense...Here's something from Loren Eiseley's "The Immense Journey," p. 210<BR/><BR/>"If 'dead' matter has reared up this curious landscape of fiddling crickets, song sparrows, and wondering men, it must be plain even to the most devoted materialist that the matter of which he speaks contains amazing, if not dreadful powers, and may not impossibly be, as Hardy has suggested, 'but one mask of many waorn by The Great Face behind."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1228648840567624890.post-50192232370140165582007-09-15T11:32:00.000-04:002007-09-15T11:32:00.000-04:00Interesting, and it's not just an issue of the sca...Interesting, and it's not just an issue of the scale "out there" but an issue of the scale at which we, the observers, exist. Maybe that determines our reception of "messages" from different forms of matter.<BR/><BR/>Here's another issue of scale that I recently came across--how TIME scale is involved in our designation of "miracles." Rain water goes up a vine and into grapes. The grapes are crushed; they ferment; they become wine. Water becomes wine--it just takes a while.<BR/><BR/>Over 13 billion years hydrogen becomes compassion. If it happened in an instant, would it be a "miracle"?John Kotrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02471048328678222796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1228648840567624890.post-73220609725455708902007-09-14T19:05:00.000-04:002007-09-14T19:05:00.000-04:00You were correct last week in asserting that matte...You were correct last week in asserting that matter would be tough--but, you rose to the challenge. It is a matter of scale, isn't it? I've been reading an article about nano-technology in which an attempt is made to give "nano" meaning. For example, a nanometer is explained as a billionth of a meter. Now, thatt doesn't mean a whole lot me, especially in an era where politicians talk about trillions of dollars without blinking an eye. When I was a kid, a trillion was used only to express the inexpressible. <BR/><BR/>This comparison gave nanometer some meaning for me. If the earth were a meter, then a nanometer would be a marble. That has meaning, but I find it somehwat prosaic, you know, a marble is a familiar object. This comparison blew me away. A naometer is defined as the amount of growth in my beard from the time I pick up my razor until I put the razor on my face. WOW!<BR/><BR/>Then, there's a recent description of a new computer chip that has "gates" that control the movementr of data. These "gates" are 5 atoms thick. My question is: How does anyone know they are there? Their existence was proved when a computer using the chip sent a message to its creators. Are other forms of matter also sending us messages? Maybe we only recognize the ones that we create while the universe may be filled with "nanos" fo them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com