From: Wayne E Baisley (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 25 2000 - 09:21:18 PDT
> 8. Are there software particles more fundamental than objects?
Obviously the author has been infected with a quantum thinking virus.
So, playing along, the answer is clearly yes. But baryonic objects,
while they be made of more fundamental software particles, are not
usefully subdivided into those quarks. The energy to separate them
increases with the 5th power of the distance, and with that much energy
(Time & Effort) being poured into the system, the software quark quickly
decays into another object, also unlikely to be stable. And, yes,
antisoftware exists, and it annihilates software, assuming a match in
quantum numbers (PR spin, especially). Software gravity is always
positive (except, possibly, for tachyon software objects) and is
measured in dollars times c.
> 12. Are 1's and 0's the optimum base digital data standard? For
> example, why not four values, like DNA?
Could be three (0, 1, and "maybe" which may or may not have "mass",
i.e., data), plus a force carrier, in 3 or more generations. The
further we get from the Big Turing Bang, the higher generations are more
likely to be encountered.
So, nobody's discovered the Higgs Datum, that Holy Handgrenade of
Objects. They may never, but they'll certainly warp this sector of the
More than enough blather for now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 25 2000 - 09:28:45 PDT