Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA23355 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:19:39 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 10:13:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Thoughts and Perceptions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed From: "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <184.108.40.206.0.20020418064242.00b40d48@localhost> Message-Id: <7A6603B7-52D6-11D6-A1A2-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Thursday, April 18, 2002, at 06:51 , Joachim Maier wrote:
> Is that like the speed of light? a condition of the universe? A fact?
> Now I read just a couple of weeks ago that 2 scientific teams not only
> slowed light down, but completely stopped light, and after a while
> released it again.
> They seemed to have changed a fact into a concept, and back into a
> fact. :)
Sounds like the mantra of the anti-scientist at work, maybe.
The speed of light is indeed a fact.
It is also a fact that light, as a particle, is acted upon by outside
And, taking several facts, and using them, is conceptual science. The
result- the slowing of light- is a fact.
Nothing to be bothered about.
The proof is in the pudding.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 18 2002 - 16:20:14 BST