If we start using reverse definitions then will all of us always? and how will
this help replication of someones device? They indicate they used the north pole,
but we would have to ask which north pole!
I had exactly that problem with Davis and Rawls stuff before I knew they meant
reverse definition, it meant I used the north (conventional) when I should have
used the south, so the positive energy from the north pole caused an adverse
action.
This is why we need to have one definition and stick to it, It is not a big bother
to just understand that it should be the other way round, but that is not
practical, Now if you started a big petition and had hundreds of scientists sign
it and take it to an authority is scientific standards and had it televised then
it might be a good idea, but it would still cause confusion, but it might be worth
it, but otherwise you are simply doing it so it is neat, but I'm sorry it is
stupid and impractical to use reverse definition just so it is neat.
THE TROLL wrote:
> Hi Folks.
>
> "BUT RATHER THAN SWITCHING THE NAMES"
>
> That pretty much says it right there.
>
> I think most folks are living lives that are based on non-facts
> (as determined by current knowledge and logic) and it is due largely to
> the very attitude that is suggested here.
>
> It is too inconvenient to move from ignorance to enlightenment,
> even concerning the simplest of things.
>
> Personally,I chose to help propagate the facts of today and the
> potential facts of tomorrow rather than propagate the ignorance of
> yesterday: We already have enough of that.
then change the world, but you better change the whole world because it is
dangerous if anyone doesn't understand the way it is.
>
>
> David
>
> ------------------
> John Berry wrote:
> >
> > Oh dear, We're not going to have this discussion again are we? I already
> > have a headache!
> >
> <snip>
>
> > And no the problem was not started by three professors, they got it right,
> > the problem started because before anyone knew too much about how magnets
> > worked they named the pole which turned north the north seeking pole,
> > however the seeking part was left off (slackness) and it became known as the
> > north pole of a magnet, but logic says that if we know opposites attract and
> > what we call the north pole of a magnet points to north geographic pole then
> > one of those norths is really a south, *BUT RATHER THAN SWITCHING THE NAMES*
> > we call the poles of a magnet they called the north (geographic) pole of the
> > earth the south pole of a magnet. (which is no problem as we just put
> > "geographic" in when we are not talking about magnets)
> >
> > John Berry
> >
>
> --
> E-mail to: broompilot@juno.com (no attachments)
>
> Otherwise: broompilot@netzero.net
>
> Fax to: 1-253-681-1133
> __________________________________________
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
> with the body text: leave Interact
> list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> http://keelynet.com/interact/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------