kpaulc at [remove]earthlink.net
Wed Mar 17 18:12:39 EST 2004
"Didier A. Depireux" <didier at rai.isr.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:c39t4f$sbc$1 at grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> ken <kpaulc@[remove]earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Will reply some 'time' after [if] I awaken
> > ken
> Why is 'time' in quotes? Is there an ambiguity
> about the meaning of the word 'time' in the
> above sentence, or do you have a special
> definition for that word?
I've Eliminated what's been referred to as "time",
and have been working to do so across all of
Doing so alters nothing within routine Perception,
but I've found, and continue to find, that there's
Enormous Benefit in doing so.
What's been referred to as "time" is 'just' a Com-
pletely-redundant representation of the one-way
flow of energy, from order to disorder, that
is what's =described= by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T].
'Clocks' don't meter non-physically-real 'time'.
They meter energy-flowing in rigorous accord
with WDB2T, be it in the unwinding of a spring,
the draining of excess potential from a battery,
or in the case of 'atomic-clocks', WDB2T, it-
self, across the Universe as a whole.
There's Enormous Benefit to Eliminating non-
physically-real 'time', in this way because it
makes cross-entity Science flat-out-Easy to do.
It is Impossible to actually Do Neuroscience
without Eliminating non-physically-real 'time'.
Getting by the "Impossibility", inherent, provided
the first impetus to Eliminate it.
I Apologize for my Funny "syntax". It's mostly
just a way in which I "entertain" myself, so as
to stave-off "boredom" in the midst of endeavor,
here in b.n, that tends to be mind-deadeningly-
I use single quotes to signify "not-exactly", in an
attempt to be Forthright with respect to my use
of 'language', which is so-amazingly individually-
unique across Humanity.
It's Hilarious that folks, not realizing this, routinely
'blame' each other for what is actually 'language's
Cheers, Didier, ken [k. p. collins]
More information about the Neur-sci