Re: neccesity of mental memes

From: Steve Drew (
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 10:27:47 GMT

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Civilisations as a System of Memeplexes"

    Received: by id KAA06580 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:32:03 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Steve Drew" <>
    Subject:  Re: neccesity of mental memes
    Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:27:47 +0000
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jan 2002 10:27:47.0771 (UTC) FILETIME=[98B338B0:01C1A8AF]
    Precedence: bulk

    <Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:30:17 -0800
    From: "Joe Dees" <>
    Subject: Re: neccesity of mental memes

    A universal meansurement of length could be, say, multiples of an
    primary particle's (say a proton's, neutron's or electron's) radius.  It
    would certainly not be either anthropomorphic, arbitrary (since it is a
    building block of the universe) or changeable>

    It would be universal but it would still be arbitray in the sense that we
    assign the value in the first place. I could say that the radius of a proton
    is 'one metre' (say) and base every other measurement on that. How is that
    any different to choosing a standard metal rod as the unit.


    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

    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 : Tue Jan 29 2002 - 10:45:03 GMT