not quite Father Inire's mirrors . . .

DAVID STOCKHOFF · 08 Jun 2011, 18:59 · from 2011-June.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: dstockhoff at verizon.net (DAVID STOCKHOFF)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: (urth) not quite Father Inire's mirrors . . .
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinKONC9An0p0D3=4rEjuAfAC49MLw at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <834448.76362.qm at web84108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Stupendous!

I should never be surprised at how much older ideas turn out to be than one thinks, or than the technology that seeks to employ them. 

--- On Wed, 6/8/11, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) not quite Father Inire's mirrors . . .
> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
> Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 1:46 PM
> DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:
> 
> > "Virtual particles" seem to provide a plausible
> explanation even if they postdate the books:
> 
> Actually, they were first proposed by Paul M.A. Dirac in
> 1930, so no
> problem there. The positron was conceived of as a "hole in
> the Dirac
> sea" before it was recognized as an anti-electron and
> demonstrated in
> 1932.
> 
> -- 
> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net