The electronic flow of patterns that we interpret as "on" or "off" - "1" or
"0" - is abstract and arbitrarily defined.
Much as the printing in this
post. It's a certainty you can claim the monitor you are reading this on is
physical. But you can't claim the words I write have physical
presence.
Turn off the monitor and weigh it.
Turn on the monitor
and weigh it.
It doesn't matter how "busy" with words the screen is -
they will not add to your discomfort if you drop the monitor on your
toes.
While you can claim the physical disks in a box falling on your
head will cause pain - it will cause no more pain then if the disks are "full"
compared with if they are "empty".
You are deliberately conflating the
physical (the plastic) with the abstract (the interpretation of the magnetic
pattern). Or perhaps you are simply regurgitating the arguments you've seen
from Lawyers that you yourself do not agree with.
To follow your own
example:
Webster's dictionary is a physical combination of paper and -
possibly - cardboard cover with glue holding it together.
The words -
however - are abstract. Whether the 800 pages of a given book are empty or full
of printed words does not alter the fact that:
The paper and cover are
physical
The ink is physical
The flow of meaning that we call
words are abstract
To speak of the physical (paper and ink) as though it is
the words is to deliberately conflate the differences between the two.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
