From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   On 6/27/25 6:05 AM, jillery wrote:   
      
   > Consider the question: Is it possible to sufficiently analyze magic?   
   > If technology is phenomena based on natural law, and magic is   
   > phenomena based on supernatural law, then in principle anything that   
   > can be sufficiently analyzed is by definition technology.  If I could   
   > reliably make phenomena happen by waving a stick and/or chanting odd   
   > words, then I would have identified a natural law, which makes it not   
   > magic by definition.   
      
   Autism isn't an argument, you nimrod.   
      
   Honey; it ain't a law unless it's first a theory, and it ain't   
   a theory unless it's first a hypothesis and it ain't a   
   hypothesis without predictions -- the basis for experimentation.   
      
   You need to stick to arguing that "Paradox" is French for "An   
   erroneous assumption." You shit at that too, but you're a lot   
   more practiced at it....   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)