Richard: If there are infinite stars – and therefore infinite
light – there is also infinite space – and therefore infinite dark – which means that one argument cancels the other out.
Which is probably why the night sky looks as it does – a nice balance – and a rather pretty display at that.
Konrad: Well, well. Your resources to find new
arguments is apparently another infinity in you. Now, what is wrong with this argument? To begin with, darkness is the absence of
light. So, again, no matter how diluted the universe is, the old mathematical argument of the intensity diminishing with the
square of the distance, and the number of stars increasing with the third power applies here, too. The light cannot be absorbed by
the darkness in such a way, that it disappears. This is because of the law of conservation of energy. All energy that is radiated
by the stars must remain somewhere. This argument is now refuted. I am very curious about what you will come up with next.
Richard: I am not going to have to come up with anything next as the obvious
flaw in your logic above lies in your basic premise. To wit: ‘Darkness is the absence of light’. Who says so? We could just as
easily say that light is the absence of dark. If you wish to prove something logically you have to posit an initial fact upon
which to build your case and I, for one, cannot buy such a spurious assumption that ‘dark is the absence of light’ as being an
established absolute.
Have you heard of the ‘DARKSUCKER HYPOTHESIS’?
For years the electrical utility companies have led the public to believe they were in
business to supply electricity to the consumer, a service for which they charge a substantial rate. The recent accidental
acquisition of secret records from a well known power company has led to a massive research campaign which positively explodes
several myths and exposes the massive hoax which has been perpetrated upon the public by the power companies.
The most common hoax promoted the false concept that light bulbs emitted light; in
actuality, these ‘light’ bulbs actually absorb DARK which is then transported back to the power generation stations via wire
networks. A more descriptive name has now been coined; the new scientific name for the device is DARKSUCKER.
This is a brief synopsis of the darksucker theory, which proves the existence of dark
and establishes the fact that dark has great mass, and further, that dark particle (the anti-photon) is the fastest known particle
in the universe. Apparently, even the celebrated Dr. Albert Einstein did not suspect the truth that just as COLD is the absence of
HEAT, then LIGHT is actually the absence of DARK. Scientists have now proven that light does not really exist.
The basis of the darksucker theory is that electric light bulbs suck dark. Take for
example, the darksuckers in the room where you are right now. There is much less dark right next to the darksuckers than there is
elsewhere, demonstrating their limited range. The larger the darksucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Darksuckers in a
parking lot or on a football field have a much greater capacity than the ones in used in the home, for example.
It may come as a surprise to learn that darksuckers also operate on a celestial scale;
witness the Sun. Our Sun makes use of dense dark, sucking it in from all the planets and intervening dark space. Naturally, the
Sun is better able to suck dark from the planets which are situated closer to it, thus explaining why those planets appear
brighter than do those which are far distant from the Sun. Occasionally, the Sun actually over-sucks; under those conditions, dark
spots appear on the surface of the Sun. Scientists have long studied these ‘spots’ and are only recently beginning to realise
that the dark spots represent leaks of high pressure dark because the Sun has over-sucked dark to such an extent that some dark
actually leaks back into space. This leakage of high pressure dark frequently causes problems with radio communications here on
Earth due to collisions between the dark particles as they stream out into space at high velocity via the black holes in the
surface of the Sun.
As with all man-made devices, darksuckers have a finite lifetime caused by the fact
that they are not 100% efficient at transmitting collected dark back to the power company via the wires from your home, causing
dark to build up slowly within the device. Once they are full of accumulated dark, they can no longer suck. This condition can be
observed by looking for the black spot on a full darksucker when it has reached maximum capacity of un-transmitted dark ... you
have surely noticed that dark completely surrounds a full darksucker because it no longer has the capacity to suck any dark at
all.
A candle is a primitive darksucker. A new candle has a white wick. You will notice that
after the first use the wick turns black, representing all the dark which has been sucked into it. If you hold a pencil next to
the wick of an operating candle, the tip will turn black because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle. And it is
of no use to plug a candle into an electrical outlet; it can only collect dark ... being primitive it has no transmission
capabilities. Unfortunately, these original darksuckers have a very limited range and are hazardous to operate because of the
intense heat produced.
There are also portable darksuckers called flashlights. The bulbs in these devices
collect dark which is passed to a dark storage unit called a battery. When the dark storage unit is full, it must be either
emptied (a process called ‘recharging’) or replaced before the portable darksucker can continue to operate. If you break open
a battery, you will find dense black dark inside, evidence that it is actually a compact dark storage unit.
Respondent: The dark sucker hypothesis is another con
job peddled by some jokester and you, Richard peddled it back here as though it was a serious scientific finding. Please do refer
to the URL: http://remus.rutgers.ed...s/Jokes/Misc/darksucker
Richard: Oh dear ... was it only a joke after all? Next you will be telling me
that the following report is not genuine too. Vis.:
EURO-ENGLISH: The European Commission has just announced an agreement that English will
be the official language of the European Community – rather than German (the other possibility). Having chosen English as the
preferred language in the EEC, the European Parliament has commissioned a feasibility study in ways of improving efficiency in
communications between Government departments.
European officials have often pointed out that English spelling is unnecessarily
difficult; for example: cough, plough, rough, through and thorough. What is clearly needed is a phased programme of changes to
iron out these anomalies. The programme would, of course, be administered by a committee staff at top level by participating
nations.
As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty’s Government conceded that English spelling
had some room for improvement, and has accepted a 5 year phase-in of new rules that would apply to the language and reclassify it
as Euro-English. The agreed plan is as follows:
In the first year, the soft ‘c’ would be replaced by ‘s’. Sertainly, this will
make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard ‘c’ will be replased by ‘k’. This should klear up konfusion and keyboards
kan now have one less letter.
There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome ‘ph’
is replased by ‘f’. This will reduse ‘fotograf’ by 20%.
In the third year, publik akseptance of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the
stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters, which have always ben
a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent ‘e’s in the language is disgrasful, and
they should eliminat them.
By the forz year, peopl wil be reseptiv to lingwistik korektions such as replasing ‘th’
with ‘z’ and ‘w’ with ‘v’ (saving mor keyboard spas).
During ze fifz year, ze unesesary ‘o’ kan be dropd from vords kontaining ‘ou’
and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.
After zis fifz year, ve vil hav a reli sensibil riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or
difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer.
ZE DREM VIL FINALI KUM TRU!
Library Index
