<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: That Thing Called Television</title>
	<atom:link href="http://madisonian.net/2006/08/13/that-thing-called-television/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://madisonian.net/2006/08/13/that-thing-called-television/</link>
	<description>a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:59:42 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Frank Pasquale</title>
		<link>http://madisonian.net/2006/08/13/that-thing-called-television/comment-page-1/#comment-68477</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Pasquale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:57:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://madisonian.net/?p=738#comment-68477</guid>
		<description>Both Klinkenborg&#039;s musings and your article remind me of one of my favorite little intellectual histories, &quot;The History of the Atom in Western Thought&quot; (Pullman).  Just when people thought they knew the fundamental building blocks of things, they tended to find out that there another &quot;turtle&quot; beneath the prior one.  And of course the &quot;porousness&quot; of a world of atoms is something we all find intuitively hard to accept, but is scientifically irrefutable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both Klinkenborg&#8217;s musings and your article remind me of one of my favorite little intellectual histories, &#8220;The History of the Atom in Western Thought&#8221; (Pullman).  Just when people thought they knew the fundamental building blocks of things, they tended to find out that there another &#8220;turtle&#8221; beneath the prior one.  And of course the &#8220;porousness&#8221; of a world of atoms is something we all find intuitively hard to accept, but is scientifically irrefutable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

