Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (66254)	5/18/2006 12:21:20 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

"At best you asked a question on one item. And even beyond that it looks more likely that you're using a different defintion of dimension are wrapping it up now as if it's the same definition." I did not. I used your explanation of how time qualifies as a dimension and applied that to other areas that could be similarly qualified. You have made several mistakes in this discussion regarding form and application. I have clarified for you on each occasion. Apparently you are still tripping over the same logic. "You may not see a reason why the same rules would not apply but you can't apply those rules." I said I see no reason why not and you still haven't offered one. "Change" is obviously flawed as a dimension. We measure change in the context of the one or more dimensions. What is your measure of change in the absence of any of the four dimensions of the univers? We measure time in the context of material events taking place in space. We measure change in the same manner. You saw no reason why the same rules don't apply. Go ahead establish a measure of "change" without using the four dimensions. Change is a concept, just as time is, that has dimension according to its application. Gem

To: jttmab who wrote (66254)	5/18/2006 12:48:12 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

<<<"Generosity is a universally understood idea that is not bounded in extent, as is corruption unbounded.>>> "Generosity is not measured. You can measure what exchange might occur that you dub as a generous act, but you can't measure generosity, because generosity is an abstact." Generosity is measured according to the circumstance of its application and your judgment regarding the application. So, it qualifies as a subset of 'idea/value forms', for which I have already demonstrated their qualification as dimensional. Can you measure the limits of Generosity?