 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:39:09 -0000, Kyle <hob### [at] gate net> did
spake, saying:
> On 11 Jan 2008 11:52:04 -0500, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_Kills_the_Cat
>
> <snip>The frequent rejoinder to 'curiosity killed the cat' is
> 'satisfaction brought it back'.</snip>
>
> I've never heard that one. I'll have to use it next time someone feeds
> me the curisoity line.
Around here it normally goes "but satisfaction brought it back". Heard it
all my life, just goes to show how some 'common' sayings aren't really
considered in a wider context. Unlike "all round the Wrekin" which is
definitely local.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:21:10 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
spake, saying:
> Warp wrote:
>
>> Perhaps that answers the question "If a tree falls in a forest and no
>> one
>> is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
>
> So... if a man speaks in a forest and no women is there to hear him...
> is he still wrong?
Yes by definition any male opinion is wrong regardless of location or
audience.
The last man on Earth sat contemplating his woes "Alone, so alone"
At which point the last women on Earth walks up just to contradict him.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:29:00 -0000, Nicolas Alvarez
<nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> did spake, saying:
>> As someone else said. Imagine the conversation at the hospital, then
>> imagine the roaring laughter of the doctors and staff ...
>
> I think they would be already used to people a lot more stupid.
No doubt from the patients answering the obvious question with "I
accidentally sat on it" ;-)
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:15:12 -0000, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>No doubt from the patients answering the obvious question with "I
>accidentally sat on it" ;-)
That reminds me of one a medic told me. The punch line is. "That's lifebuoy"
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:31:17 -0600, Sherry Shaw <ten### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>--Sherry "Crazy Cat Lady" Shaw
http://www.mcphee.com/items/11377.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:53:05 -0500, Kyle <hob### [at] gatenet> wrote:
>>--Sherry "Crazy Cat Lady" Shaw
>
>http://www.mcphee.com/items/11377.html
>
LOL
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > Sherry Shaw wrote:
> >> whether or not Schrödinger's Lab Assistant looks in the box, because
> >> the *cat* knows what happened."
> >
> > That was exactly the point of the thought-experiment. At what level of
> > sophistication does the "observer" collapse the possibilities? The
> > argument was over whether having instruments there was sufficient to
> > "collapse the wave form", or whether someone actually had to look at the
> > instruments.
> >
> > </fuddyduddy>
>
> "If nobody can observe you, you don't exist."
But pointing again to the cat's point of view.
What's about, if you are yourself in a box, all is black, you can't see
anything? Just thinking, in absolute darkness. Nobody can hear you. (So you
don't ecxist for other observers outside of the box.)
You can think, so you are.
But what are you? - You can't see anything.
How long can you preserve your mind?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:52:30 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>But pointing again to the cat's point of view.
Wouldn't a cat just go to sleep until it was hungry then kick butt 'till it got
out? :)
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:52:30 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >But pointing again to the cat's point of view.
>
> Wouldn't a cat just go to sleep until it was hungry then kick butt 'till it got
> out? :)
>
> Regards
> Stephen
So you are inside the box.
You can't see anything.
And you are the cat?
Where do you know from, that you should "kick butt 'till you get out"? :-)
bluetree
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:52:30 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
> > >But pointing again to the cat's point of view.
> >
> > Wouldn't a cat just go to sleep until it was hungry then kick butt 'till it got
> > out? :)
> >
> > Regards
> > Stephen
>
> So you are inside the box.
> You can't see anything.
> And you are the cat?
> Where do you know from, that you should "kick butt 'till you get out"? :-)
>
> bluetree
The mad cat lady will visit you with a chainsaw :)
Cats don't need to know they just do or don't as they feel fit.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
