Re: [OT] Re: shuttle disaster
On Monday 03 February 2003 11:45 pm, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 21:46, Pigeon wrote:
> > Alchemy is an interesting example... Of course, alchemy itself is
> > possible, because people used to do it. They were called alchemists.
> > The fact that they never achieved their fabled goals is because the
> > discipline they were following was mostly a pile of mystical bollocks
> > with very little scientific method. Now, we know that it is possible
> > to turn lead into gold, but it is not currently practical to do it on
> > more than the minutest scale. To extend one's lifespan is not
>
> Actually, an interesting point of note is the fact that alchemists
> sought to transmute LEAD into gold, and not something like helium into
> gold. So obviously, intentionally or not, they had some basic knowledge
> of atomic mass. (Probably a rudimentary one based on the observations of
> physical mass, but an understanding none the less.) That, in turn,
> rather dismisses the point of this being "mystical rhetoric" and,
> instead, brings it into the realm of scientific pursuits.
>
> -Alex
Actually, alchemists were not interested in the transmutation of the physical
element of lead to physical gold. These were only metaphorical.
In this discussion and in a parallel one, about "What Really Happend With the
Columbia" (or something close), there have been some rather strong statements
against the Bible and astrology.
Just a side note to avoid the, "How would you know?" questions, let me say I
do not take the Bible literally (I don't use it much at all -- I prefer other
"sacred" texts) and I am not an astrologer. However, I have many friends who
vary in conviction from athiest to "new-age metaphysicians" to funtamental
Christians. I've also studied many faiths and beliefs.
Alchemists were linked with astrology for a very good reason: both groups were
interested in self improvement and spiritual growth. The only problem is, if
one lived in the Holy Roman Empire, or most of Europe after the fall of the
HRE, and one had beliefs other than those espoused by the Roman Catholic
Church, one would find one's self in deep trouble (for example, you may have
heard of something called The Spanish Inquisition). Those who were working
on these disciplines hid what they were doing behind other claims and
pursuits. It was far easier to let the church believe they were turning
actual lead into gold than to let the church know that all the astrological
and alchemical symbols and writings REALLY applied to spiritual concepts that
did not fit under the umbrella of the Church's dogma.
I've noticed, in the computer world, that many people are quick to dismiss the
Bible as well as astrology (or anything that is faith based). I'd just like
to comment that I know astrologers that have studied astronomy. I have yet
to see an astronomer (or any type of scientist) who has done anything more in
studying astrology than reading their horoscope in the paper (which, btw,
serious astrologers scoff at). I know people in teaching and psychology who
effectively use astrology in their work (without telling anyone, of course).
I'm not saying it works. I'm just pointing out that the common belief of what
alchemists were doing is wrong and that people who want to discount or
denigrate any matters of faith should take the time to study what they want
to denounce. (You can always start with any of the works by the ever popular
Joseph Campbell.)
I'm not trying to start a flame war -- I'm just trying to clarify a few
mis-understandings.
Hal
Reply to: