it's amusing watching quantum mechanics and philosophy bleed on each other over such a civilised dinner banquet where everyone eats and no one seems to get full. the persuit of yes-or-no black-and-white definition, and philosophy, the practise of making a lifestyle and lifetime out of exaggerating instances where black-and-white cannot apply, has always baffled me, and never been attractive. i still "observe" that all new life, starting from void -- a void which scientists and philosophers alike seem intent on containing and defining, or at least probing relentlessly, as if it could respond in any way other than whatever the world is to any given person -- is the beginning of the end of infinity. when a child is born, it's as close to infinity and void as it will ever be until it dies, its lifetime the very process of becoming definitions while creating them from the realm of perception up to communication. same with a flower. it's born, it becomes a math problem, a beautiful math problem, a beautiful thing, and then it returns to beautiful infinity. instead of persuing philosophy within the realm of science-of-the-mind, i wish quantum mechanics would wipe the grease from their lobes and just come play volleyball with us on the underbelly of the flea that's caught in the volleyball that's trapped in the wind. using infinity in math problems is like pissing in the face of god and telling him he looks better with a wet beard.
plus i enjoyed the implications and vocabulary battle inherent in the extension in the wiki stating "..prominent physicists have gone so far as to suggest that astronomers observing dark matter in the universe in 1998 may have "reduced its life expectancy" through a pseudo-Schrödinger's Cat scenario.." if you put a philosopher in a box and never think about him, will he live forever?