sham·bol·ic (shām-bŏl'ĭk)
adj. Chiefly British Slang
- Disorderly or chaotic
This blog (bloggy blog bloggoblog) is the first on my bookmarks list. And anyone who sees my gmail status constantly set to the green little "available" circle knows that I'm a bit of an internet-enthusiast. Why was this message board -message board sounds so much more dignified- more active when no one knew about it? Things lose momentum awfully quick, and I check this thing every day even though I have little to no desire to respond. Let us gain back some momentum people (all three or four of you)
But this SHAN'T be a pity post, no! SO here are some topics:
http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/universe.html - Boy is the universe big! Like really, really, really big. Bigger than the biggest thing you can think of times infinity plus TWO. What is up with that? Being a one of the plebeians who think they know everything about everything because they watch the science channel, I wonder why, and it bothers me, that big shot scientists say that they "know" the universe is about 14 billion years old. I don't understand why they say this with such audacity and no one on TV has explained this to me. The universe isn't even a thing, it's an abstract concept. Why not try and make something a little more tangible before you attach an age or form to it.
also.....the universe is a UNI-VERSE. I'm no etymology expert (yet) and google isn't helping much...but I'm a-willing to guess that you pull the word apart and you get uni (one) and verse (all? maybe). If this is in fact the case-then where does the idea that there can be several universes...There is a big problem with theoretical physics and science as a whole if they do not stop explaining things without first trying to understand them.
Sorry for the ranting, but sometimes coffee after a lot of coffee I will coffee start to rant coffee.
Coffee.
6 comments:
http://www.lolwut.com/layout/lolwut.jpg
john....i think that maybe that picture summed it all up.
http://www.shoptheknothole.com/images/products/UW_cap_Brown_W_cap.gif
Ian is the man...
The following is an online conversation:
--
me: alright
your post got me wondering...
"The Universe is defined as the summation of all particles and energy that exist and the space-time in which all events occur."~ Wikipedia
doesn't that seem limited, though?
In that it is everything?
and then
"The Absolute is the totality of things; all that is, whether it has been discovered or not. It is usually conceived of as a unitary state of the external cosmos and internal spiritual consciousness — at least insofar as it can be acknowledged by the human mind — and is intelligible."~ Wikipedia
states that
as long as things are intelligible, and acknowledged by the human mind
well if that's true
how can the universe be that definition of everything
?
Ian: yeah, so isn't it ridiculously presumptuous to assume you know the nature of all things?
me: yes, I think it is
--
I'm not sleepy, and there is no place I'm going to. I really am sleepy though, and Ian, your post is beginning to nag at my grey matter. Thank you.
I'm sure everyone has heard the age-old assertion that there is 'nothing new under the sun.'
Last fall, I was doing a word-study of the 'original' Hebrew/Chaldee word for 'thing' as in no-thing new...
dâbâr – a word, a matter, or thing; a cause-act, advice, affair, answer, because of, book, business, care, case, certain rate, chronicles, commandment, commune, concern, confer, counsel, dearth, decree, deed, disease, due, duty, effect, eloquent, errand, glory, harm, hurt, iniquity, judgment, language, lying, manner, matter, message, oracle, ought, parts, pertaining, please, portion, promise, provision, purpose, question, rate, reason, report, request, sake, saying, sentence, sign, so, some, somewhat to say, song, speech, spoken, talk, task, that, there done, thing, thought, thus, tidings, whatsoever, wherewith, which, word, work.
When the exhaustive definition of dâbâr is read into the familiar cliché "no-thing new under the sun", every past, present, and future thing seems to be predestined to be old.
This may suggest that asking people, “What’s new?” is a faux pas, a waste of time...
...or is it? Does dâbâr refer to all that is? Is ythe universe and every subset of the universe, every subset of existence… a mere thing?
It seems to me that there may be at least two non-things that escape the ancient Ecclesiastical curse of eternal and unoriginal recurrence.
Might those non-dâbârs be (1) persons themselves and (2) perspectives themselves?
Is a non-philosophy individual allowed to post on this?
a) love the word Shambolic...will start to use it regularly
b) I think the writer of this post is really funny...thanks for a laugh today :)
c) there are lots of things that blow my mind: the size of the universe...the number/variations of insects on planet earth...people actually wanting to walk on the moon...the things we'll do when we love another...the depth of the ocean...the lack of concern people have for other humans---just to name a few.
I've found it intriguing that we seek answers with fervor. Isn't it sometimes better to sit and be comfortable with the fact that we don't have all of the answers?
d) i think anonymous is on to something when she/he says that people and their perspectives may be non-dabars, although i think we, and our perspectives are quite often shamoblic!
Post a Comment