|
Post by paulh on May 13, 2009 11:20:25 GMT
This is the Earth we are talking about. Perhaps TGAOTU is a spin bowler.
Newton gave a pretty good description of the effects of gravity but gravity is not an adequate description of the cosmos as can be seen by simple observation of galaxies that are spiral rather than elliptical.
We rescue gravity as an explanation of the cosmos by inventing dark matter.
There is more to be understood and the spinning of the Earth (or any other planet) is a good place to start.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on May 13, 2009 12:41:49 GMT
So Paul, for your question to work, you completely ignore the big bang theory.
You state "Generally speaking every action generates an equal and opposite reaction." Newton's law of motion.
I give you the originators comments on your question and you dismiss that also.
I give you an easy to understand, practical symbolic answer and you dismiss that.
We seem to be spinning in Paul's world here.
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 13, 2009 20:17:09 GMT
Well we could consider whether gravity is the only force in formation of solar systems. Electromagnetic forces might also be important.
And we could also consider whether physical matter is all there is. For example, can we apply entanglement at a solar systemic level?
We could be even more radical and ask whether the Gaia theory operates within the solar system.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on May 13, 2009 21:35:55 GMT
We could be even more radical and ask whether the Gaia theory operates within the solar system. I knew this was where we were going.
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 13, 2009 22:28:08 GMT
I wonder if the FC should not be raised until he or she has demonstrated some progress in the study of the hidden mysteries of nature and science
That policy would close most lodges but the remaining lodges would be wonders to behold
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on May 13, 2009 22:32:51 GMT
My personal favourite is the 'string theory', closely related to the Jedi concept of star wars.
While it is not so popular today as it was, I find the string theory could also be explained by the existence of a supreme being. An Architect of the Universe.
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 14, 2009 4:37:06 GMT
What if our solar system had two suns? A binary system? Could that have caused the planets to rotate? iaaa.org/pulsar/6-99-4.html#1Read that there might be a second sun behind the one we can see. Also Robert Temple (from memory) wrote about the Sun being a crystal (?) also heard the same thing said of the centre of the Earth. (Big) if - that were true could it explain some things? Maat
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 14, 2009 5:51:35 GMT
Read that there might be a second sun behind the one we can see. That is more likely to be an electrical and spiritual statement rather than a physical and gravitational statement. Thus the sun behind the sun may well be the Blazing Star. (Probably in DK somewhere)
|
|
|
Post by maximus on May 14, 2009 11:15:23 GMT
Robert Temple is full of hooey. I would think that with the Hubble telescope, not to mention probes and satillites, that we would have figured out if there were a "sun behind the sun." And it is silly to postulate that there is a crystal inside the sun. Any crystal would melt.
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 14, 2009 12:17:54 GMT
Our planets do not show in any way any gravitational influence beyond that which a single Sol could produce. Let me suggest that the word "behind" has more meanings than physical. If we consider that there may be more forces in the solar system and more levels of reality, then there may indeed be another sun behind (empowering) our sun just as a soul (sol) eventually empowers a human personality. (As above so below) Traditionally that empowering sun is known as the Blazing Star towards which many brethren aspire.
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 15, 2009 4:38:23 GMT
Do diamonds melt?! I have never stopped to think about that before... Apparently not.. just checked it out.. No. Some things don't melt no matter how hot they get. For example, CO2 and I2 sublime, go straight to the gas phase, unless under pressure. Also some things decompose when heated, like wood, this is also what happens to diamond, it becomes a vapor of C atoms.Maat PS I sincerely hope that neither of you learned men are teachers. I would give you both A's for Arrogance.
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 15, 2009 4:59:49 GMT
Robert Temple is full of hooey. I would think that with the Hubble telescope, not to mention probes and satillites, that we would have figured out if there were a "sun behind the sun." And it is silly to postulate that there is a crystal inside the sun. Any crystal would melt. And a word of Robert Temple's behalf.. Robert Temple is the author of nine books which have been translated into 43 languages. Temple's classic The Sirius Mystery, containing detailed data on the star Sirius which modern astronomers have only just discovered, was originally published in 1976 and republished in 1998 to universal acclaim. Robert Temple has a web site at www.robert-temple.com. www.newdawnmagazine.com.au/Article/The_Crystal_Sun.htmlNot bad for a dumb dude Maat Two lots of cheek, must be Friday ;D
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 15, 2009 7:45:01 GMT
it is silly to postulate that there is a crystal inside the sun. Any crystal would melt. I wonder if there is any non-physical reality. If so, how do we describe it when most of our words refer to the physical world. Must we then use words that illustrate by analogy?
|
|
|
Post by maximus on May 15, 2009 13:49:15 GMT
And a word of Robert Temple's behalf..
Robert Temple is the author of nine books which have been translated into 43 languages. Temple's classic The Sirius Mystery, containing detailed data on the star Sirius which modern astronomers have only just discovered, was originally published in 1976 and republished in 1998 to universal acclaim. Robert Temple has a web site at www.robert-temple.com.
www.newdawnmagazine.com.au/Article/The_Crystal_Sun.html
Not bad for a dumb dudeThat one can write books based on fantastic theories means nothing. Witness Sitchin. As to Temple:
|
|
|
Post by paulh on May 15, 2009 22:21:13 GMT
Leaving aside the proposition that the stone age Dogon tribe had for a hobby the study of obscure aspects of advanced western astronomy with details provided by passing anthropologists, the Dogon do provide details of a Sirius C that is currently unknown to the western astronomers. I do not know if that information was passed by the same anthropologists but await with interest any advance in western knowledge that sheds light upon this.
It may however be a while in coming as it is only in the last generation that proof was obtained for Sirius B.
As I recall the Dogon had a set of symbols asserted to come from Sirius from which they apparently deduced various matters such as the circulation of blood.
As the Widow Isis was supposed by ancient Egyptians to be closely connected to Sirius and as symbols are the primary means of teaching in Masonry, I wonder if I detect the same modus operandi. (Egypt is of course quite close to Mali)
It would be interesting to examine the symbols to see what might be learned.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on May 16, 2009 11:19:50 GMT
Sirius is associated with Isis because the constellation Orion was associated with Osiris, and Sirius in Canis Major follows Orion as it rises on the ecliptic. Sirius hearalded the annual flooding of the Nile, and as Isis is the mother of abundance, the Nile, Sirius and Isis are tied together in a symbolic triad. So, yes, there is symbolism involved here, but it is different than your neo-platonic model would suggest.
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 18, 2009 1:53:45 GMT
Atoms are supposed to spin aren't they? What makes an atom spin... the solar system is supposed to be just a big atom (kinda ;D )
What makes an unborn baby's heart beat for the first time?
It is all wondrous, isn't it.
Maat
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 18, 2009 3:54:12 GMT
Aren't electrons part of an atom? And what about the first heart beat?
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on May 18, 2009 5:10:35 GMT
Well that is an interesting point, what makes the first anything.
For those interested in supporting the universe is controlled by science theory.
Then prove you are here. Like the first heart beat . Who , when , where, how did it all begin. There had to have been a point in time when there was nothing, then there was something. This can not be proved by any known science.
The existence of God is required to give proof of the impossible, the impossible first heart beat is a gift from the creator.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on May 18, 2009 13:18:00 GMT
... There had to have been a point in time when there was nothing, then there was something. ... There was/is/will be always G-d! P When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
|
|