On Monday, May 26, 2003, at 12:40 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

> And I honestly cannot see ANY useful resemblance between
> computational objects and real physical objects.
>
> Computational objects do not have mass; do not occupy space; do not
> emit or absorb photons (so don't have colour); it makes no sense to
> ask about the velocity of sound through a Workspace or the tension
> in a String.

On Wednesday, May 28, 2003, at 05:05 AM, Adrian Sampaleanu wrote:

> The universe could be looked at as providing the environment of
> interaction and determines how the properties of one "object" can 
> affect
> other objects' properties and defines the reference system in both 
> space
> and time. Pretty simplistic, I know, but it might be good enough to 
> look
> at it this way...


Quick and dirty reverse engineering of the universe with OOP.

Metrics

Matter = state

Energy = message

Gravity = group

Space Time = reference


Anatomy

Proton = method

Neutron = data

Electron = thread

Atom =  instance

Atomic Weight = class

Molecule = application

Life = workspace

Planet = image

Sun = virtual machine

Galaxy = local area network

Universe = wide area network

Supa