Talk:Blogs:JaroslavTulach:Theory:DiamondsVsStars
From APIDesign
(Difference between revisions)
(New page: Nothing lasts forever, neither stars nor diamonds. While diamonds may last longer than a star, a diamond has no value without the light of a star. A diamond is no different than dirt in da...) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Anonymous | Anonymous | ||
| + | |||
| + | From a physical point of view, diamonds are not only shining, but also very robust. I am quite sure that the robustness can be used to distinguish diamond from dust without any star light. However I see the poetic beauty of your note, so thanks for finding a way to marry both points of view. | ||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:JaroslavTulach|JaroslavTulach]] 10:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
Current revision
Nothing lasts forever, neither stars nor diamonds. While diamonds may last longer than a star, a diamond has no value without the light of a star. A diamond is no different than dirt in darkness. The beauty of a diamond is revealed by the light of a star. They should go hand in hand.
Anonymous
From a physical point of view, diamonds are not only shining, but also very robust. I am quite sure that the robustness can be used to distinguish diamond from dust without any star light. However I see the poetic beauty of your note, so thanks for finding a way to marry both points of view.
--JaroslavTulach 10:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Follow
