Azamat, (01)
Yes, that is true: (02)
> So, antimatter as a form of matter (made of elementary antiparticles)
> is a kind of substance, the first class citizen of Aristotle's
> categories. (03)
But that is so very general that it hardly says anything. Aristotle
also developed the form-matter distinction, which doesn't quite fit
the ten categories. Aristotle's matter does not correspond exactly
to the modern physicists' concept of matter, which itself undergoes
major revisions with new discoveries and new theories. (04)
As Peirce said, (05)
"It is easy to be certain. One has only to be sufficiently vague." (06)
For some purposes, a vague answer is adequate. But for other purposes,
it is necessary to deal with the very annoying details that don't fit
together as nicely as one would hope. (07)
John (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|