Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00691)

I guess I am behind the times. I thought the fundamental part was
Aether!

That is the part that is manufactured as a part of the solar fire. It
also manifests itself in a way as the Solar Wind.

I thought that each radiant body manufactured a specificially charged
solar wind particles along with ether particles, so that each star is
surrounded by an aether cloud, by which light waves are transmitted,
and we can become aware of other stars, when the clouds meet and
intermingle.

There has to be something to account for the solar wind defying the
gravity well of the Sun.

So that there may be other Universes out there from the Big Bang that
we don't know about because their aether clouds haven't travelled far
enough through space to intermingle with ours.?

Dennis

----- Original Message -----
From: Mic Forster <micforster@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Theosophy and Science


>
> Adelasie,
> In the latest issue of New Scientist I think they answer your
question in regards to metaphysical philosophy and mainstream science.
I shall provide a quote to demonstrate my point:
> "What are the fundamental building blocks of the Universe? Once we
were told they were atoms. Then it turned out that these were not
fundamental at all, but made of protons, neutrons and electrons.
Protons and neutrons are in turn made of quarks. Deeper still, we now
learn, come tiny vibrating strings and membranes living in space of 10
or 11 dimensions. But we all expect that one day physicists will
finally discover the deepest structures of nature. Won't they?
> "Not necessarily. Maybe it's impossible to discover these deepest
structures. What's more, maybe it doesn't matter what they are. That's
the startling claim of Robert Laughlin, a Nobel laureate at Stanford
University. According to Laughlin, it may be that what we call reality
is a spontaneous phenomenon, emerging like a wave out of some forever
unknowable cosmic medium."
> Samuel, E (2002). What lies beneath. New Scientist, 9th February
2002, Pp: 24 - 27.
> Slowly getting there!!
> Mic
> adelasie <adelasie@surfari.net> wrote: Dear Leon,
>
> Thanks for your comments. You always put these scientific issues in
> better perspective for me. It seems from what you say here that
> science is indeed moving toward discovering its link with
> metaphysical philosophy. How widespread is this trend? Is it
anywhere
> near mainstream? And what about the question of ethical application?
> From a layman's point of view, it seems that science is moving in
> some alarming directions: military science, genetic technology,
> nuclear power, etc. Does the theosophical philosophy inform science
> in any way?
>
> Best wishes,
> Adelasie