: Thed,

: I am amazed at the way in which you concisely and skillfully you break down Human I. Scientist's enlightening comments. It can be hard to relate to a scientist with an intellect so powerful as to be able to understand the secrets of the universe, but you have the added difficulty of dealing with this future Nobel prize winner in what is not his first language. I would even go so far as to bet the family farm that English is not his second language, either. Probably fourth or fifth. And I would almost be sure that before he gained these spoken languages, he probably mastered Greek, Latin, and hyroglyphics. Kudos to you, you do a great job, and I like the way people who visit this page regularly seem to treat mail that is sometimes slightlyless than serious.

: : too da loo

I very much doubt that 'human i. scientist' is of nobel prize winning material. I'm not sure if its just the apparent language barrier, but he/she uses arguements and reasoning which are very general in nature. That is, using 'common sense' reasoning which may be applicable to the everyday macroscopic world and then transferring this reasoning to areas such as quantum physics. I admit i know little on the subject of quantum physics, but a do no enough that the quantum world is far different from the world around us. And it is impossible for us to even visualise what is going on in this world due its nature, for example, picturing electrons as little particles orbiting nuclei. While it is actually thought that electrons are some weird combination a particle and a wave. Also the fact that an inherent uncertainty exists to its position and velocity at any time.

So it can be seen by the very nature of many areas of physics that everday parallels cannot be drawn in many cases. And on 'thed', i have read his previous replys to 'human i. scientist', and i believe that he presents a very balanced view with explanations and evidence and was nice in way he communicated that some of the ideas presented by 'human i, scientist' just didn't apply in the world of physics.

You mention 'human i. scientist's' enlightening view. Well anyone can make up their version of how they see the universe, but, without any SCIENTIFIC REASONING or evidence it is nothing more than that person personal view (not enlighted view).

• Re: Thed - Human I. Scientist. - June 10, 1998 - 00:19 UTC