Re: Relational "Space"

[Judith Rosen <***>]

John M,

It's an interesting point you bring up in your post, but the first line of
it: 'Would it be a proper paraphrasing' of my closing question...--
unfortunately the answer is no. There was an essential set of ideas missing
from your paraphrase. What I was asking had to do with the space between the
parts of a complex system, not emptiness. My point was that the space
between is not empty.

Judith

----- Original Message -----
From: "John M" <***>
To: <***>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ROSEN] Relational "Space"


> Judith,
>
> would it be a proper paraphrasing of your closing question:
> "What is emptiness full of?"
> David Bohm calculated in proper physical terms that 1 ccm
> of absolute vacuum contains 10^120 times the energy of the
> combined material content of the universe. ..
> With the example of my version to the old problem:
> is the glass half full or half empty? I say: the glass is too big -
> I have to respond to your question that space is a rather
> reductionist organizing feature in our (human) view of the
> universe and we do no favor by pushing it beyond human reason.
>
> John M
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Judith Rosen" <***>
> To: <***>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Relational "Space"
>
>
> > Regarding Tim's comment, below:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tim Gwinn" <***>
> > > On the other hand, since by definition we cannot directly perceive
this
> > > primary structure, then is there strong reason to even postulate its
> > > existence?
> >
> > The ancient Greeks came up with a theory of atomic structure long before
> > humanity achieved the level of technology to verify that atoms were,
> indeed,
> > the building blocks of all matter.They postulated that either matter was
> > infinitely divisible or it wasn't. If it wasn't, then there had to be a
> > "smallest system" that couldn't be fractured and still be what matter is
> > made of. It's no surprise that my father had to go all the way back to
> > Aristotle to find the kind of analogies with which to anchor his
> theoretical
> > framework. The fact that the kind of organization in the atom is also
seen
> > in systems of all types (like biological systems' organization), all
sizes
> > (galaxies,etc.) would suggest that the "primary structure" is a version
of
> > something we see in front of us all the time.
> >
> > One question this raises for me: The space between the parts of an
intact
> > system is not "empty". What is that space, then?
> >
> > It's hard to shake off the habits of a lifetime in the way we look at
> > things. My father had a knack for looking at familiar things
> "differently",
> > on purpose, just to see how different perspectives could affect his
> > perception of what he was observing.
> >
> > Judith