Search Results
8/8/2025, 4:09:57 PM
>>534436671
>The atomistic void hypothesis was a response to the paradoxes of Parmenides and Zeno, the founders of metaphysical logic, who put forth difficult-to-answer arguments in favor of the idea that there can be no movement. They held that any movement would require a void—which is nothing—but a nothing cannot exist. The Parmenidean position was "You say there is a void; therefore the void is not nothing; therefore there is not the void."[45][46] The position of Parmenides appeared validated by the observation that where there seems to be nothing there is air, and indeed even where there is not matter there is something, for instance light waves. The atomists agreed that motion required a void, but simply rejected the argument of Parmenides on the grounds that motion was an observable fact. Therefore, they asserted, there must be a void.
>And when the light runs out...
>You see nothing.
>Of course, your mind can't make anything of nothing.
>But what if?
>What if it became even darker?
>Darker than dark.
>What if we could take away
>the light that wasn't there
>Until we reached another side?
> In deriving individual things from atoms, he mainly considered the qualities of warm and cold. The warm or firelike he took to be a combination of fine, spheric, and very movable atoms, as opposed to the cold and moist.
>He derived the soul, the origin of life, consciousness, and thought, from the finest fire-atoms;
>There's a
>Light inside your soul
>That's still shining in the cold
>I saw the fire in your eyes... that's proof enough for me.
>There! That's what I wanted to see!
>Flickering red, like pretty little flames...
>warm and cold
>ICE-E and ERAM
>The Freemoving Soul
>Unmoving Crystals of Ice
>The atomistic void hypothesis was a response to the paradoxes of Parmenides and Zeno, the founders of metaphysical logic, who put forth difficult-to-answer arguments in favor of the idea that there can be no movement. They held that any movement would require a void—which is nothing—but a nothing cannot exist. The Parmenidean position was "You say there is a void; therefore the void is not nothing; therefore there is not the void."[45][46] The position of Parmenides appeared validated by the observation that where there seems to be nothing there is air, and indeed even where there is not matter there is something, for instance light waves. The atomists agreed that motion required a void, but simply rejected the argument of Parmenides on the grounds that motion was an observable fact. Therefore, they asserted, there must be a void.
>And when the light runs out...
>You see nothing.
>Of course, your mind can't make anything of nothing.
>But what if?
>What if it became even darker?
>Darker than dark.
>What if we could take away
>the light that wasn't there
>Until we reached another side?
> In deriving individual things from atoms, he mainly considered the qualities of warm and cold. The warm or firelike he took to be a combination of fine, spheric, and very movable atoms, as opposed to the cold and moist.
>He derived the soul, the origin of life, consciousness, and thought, from the finest fire-atoms;
>There's a
>Light inside your soul
>That's still shining in the cold
>I saw the fire in your eyes... that's proof enough for me.
>There! That's what I wanted to see!
>Flickering red, like pretty little flames...
>warm and cold
>ICE-E and ERAM
>The Freemoving Soul
>Unmoving Crystals of Ice
Page 1