Thinking without language?

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Wed Nov 24 22:34:48 EST 1999


you were correct. energy-flow is continuous. it's a 'long-story'.

ken

mithomps at indiana.edu wrote:

> Jure Sah wrote:
>
> > Ok, I admit I goofed it.
>
> That's okay.  Oddly enough though, I remember once when I was nine years
> old saying to my father that perhaps things weren't *really* hot or
> cold.  Instead maybe they were really really hot then really really
> cold, but they changed so fast that they felt only a little hot or a
> little cold.  My father then asked me, if that was so why did hot things
> make cold things warmer when they were placed in contact?  I said it was
> because the really really hot flashes splashed over into the other body
> like higher waves absorbing smaller waves.  He had me then and asked
> that if that was so why didn't the waves just cancel out and leave you
> with small waves, and thus really cold temperatures?  That meant, he
> pounded another nail into the lid, temperature wasn't like a large wave
> sloshing back and forth, so why should I expect heat to conduct at all
> if the temperature was always changing really really fast?  If I'd been
> serious about the thought I could have probably gotten around that
> eventually, but I knew when I was beaten.
>
> Mikael Thompson








More information about the Neur-sci mailing list