mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
THOTH
-A Catastrophics Newsletter-

VOL I, No. 20
August 3, 1997

EDITOR:  Michael Armstrong
PUBLISHER:  Brian Stewart

CONTENTS:

EDITORIAL.................................Michael Armstrong
FAR APART, TWO PARTICLES RESPOND FASTER THAN LIGHT
............by Malcolm W. Browne
FROM SUN TO EARTH:  TRACKING A NEW STORM.......Science News
VELIKOVSKY'S COMET VENUS(4)...................David Talbott
-----------------------------------------------

Quote of the day:

The more absurd the model, the better the public will like 
it.  It will than become a "fact." ...........Wal Thornhill
-----------------------------------------------

EDITORIAL
By Michael Armstrong
(mikamar at e-z.net)

The Photon experiment referenced in the article below is 
just another confirmation of what John Bell has already 
proven logically and mathematically in his 
"Interconnectedness Theorem," a theorem some physicists have 
seen as one of the most profound developments in the history 
of science.  In 1964, while wrestling with the famous EPR 
paradox, physicist John Bell came up with his 
Interconnectedness Theorem which he "rigorously proved", 
stating that you cannot retain both "objectivity" and 
"locality" on a fundamental level.  At the phenomenal level 
(in contrast to the level of experience), either one, or 
both of these are a false.  In 1982 this was verified in the 
laboratory by physicists Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard and 
Gerard Roger of the Institute of Optics at the University of 
Paris, and the point has subsequently been verified in other 
places as well.

What this literally means is that if reality is "objective" 
(you aren't some bad dream all in my own mind) then all 
experienced reality (the explicate or manifest realm) is 
some kind of projection from another "non-local" realm 
(implicate or non-manifest realm) a la Karl Pribram and 
David Bohm's Holographic Universe paradigm.  The implicate 
realm would be a dimensionless realm comparable to hologram 
interference patterns in which all aspects of experienced 
reality, including distance and separateness (locality) are 
only implied.  Electromagnetic signal propagation in the 
implicate realm would be instantaneous, giving an infinite 
velocity between any two points in the projected or manifest 
realm.

As far as the photon experiment described below, the theory 
would say that "pairs" of particles are comparable to 
perpendicular projections of an underlying reality, thus 
giving rise to two simultaneously projected views of only a 
single entity.

META-MYSTICAL MUSH

After a lucid account of the experiment in the first half of 
the article, the author descends into the kind of "meta-
mystical" musing typical of the proponents of Quantum 
Theory, replete with a reference to the most absurd 
"explanation" of them all, i.e., the "many worlds" 
hypothesis.  This last hypothesis is the most outrageous 
copout ever dignified by journalism.  If taken seriously and 
to its logical conclusion, it would undermine any basis for 
serious science, including any basis for morality, in that 
no matter what choices one would make in this world, any and 
all possibilities would inexorably take place in another.

This "many worlds" hypothesis also violates one of the most 
fundamental principles of philosophy by saying "everything" 
and "nothing" simultaneously.  It is unfalsifiable, 
unuseable, unhelpful and unwarranted; the perfect capstone 
for the modern mythology.
--------------------------------------

FAR APART, TWO PARTICLES RESPOND FASTER THAN LIGHT
by Malcolm W. Browne

(From the New York Times Science Section, Tuesday, July 22, 1997)

It was as if some ghostly bridge across the city of Geneva 
had permitted two photons of light nearly seven miles apart 
to respond simultaneously to a stimulus applied to just one 
of them.

The twin-photon experiment by Dr. Nicolas Gisin of the 
University of Geneva and his colleagues last month was the 
most spectacular demonstration yet of the mysterious long-
range connections that exist between quantum events, 
connections created from nothing at all, which in theory can 
reach from one end of the universe to the other.

In essence, Dr. Gisin sent pairs of photons in opposite 
directions to villages north and south of Geneva along 
optical fibers of the kind used to transmit telephone calls.  
Reaching the ends of these fibers, the two photons were 
forced to make random choices between alternative, equally 
possible pathways.

Since there was no way for the photons to communicate with 
each other, "classical" physics would predict that their 
independent choices would bear no relationship to each 
other.  But when the paths of the two photons were properly 
adjusted and the results compared, the independent decisions 
by the paired photons always matched, even though there was 
no physical way for them to communicate with each other.

Albert Einstein sneered [at] the very possibility of such a 
thing, calling it "spooky action at a distance."  Scientists 
still (somewhat shamefacedly) speak of the "magic" of 
"quantum weirdness."  And yet all experiments in recent 
years have shown that Einstein was wrong and that action at 
a distance is real."

One of the leading experimentalists in quantum optics, Dr. 
Raymond P. Chiao of the U. of California, Berkeley, hailed 
the Geneva experiment as "wonderful."

But an underlying enigma of quantum mechanics remains 
unfathomed.

The connections that persist between distant but entangled 
particles are "one of the deep mysteries of quantum 
mechanics," Dr. Chiao said in an interview.  "These 
connections are a fact of nature proven by experiments, but 
to try to explain them philosophically is very difficult," 
he said.

Quantum events obey the laws of quantum theory, which 
governs the behavior of minute objects like atoms and 
subatomic particles, including photons of light.  By 
contrast with the laws of "classical" physics (which apply 
to the relatively large objects of the everyday world), 
quantum physics often exhibits behavior that seems 
impossible.

One of the weird aspects of quantum mechanics is that 
something can simultaneously exist and not exist; if a 
particle is capable of moving along several different paths, 
or existing in several different states, the uncertainty 
principle of quantum mechanics allows it to travel along all 
paths and exist in all possible states simultaneously.  
However, if the particle happens to be measured by some 
means, its path or state is no longer uncertain. The simple 
act of measurement instantly forces it into just one path or 
state.

Physicists call this a "collapse of the wave function."  The 
amazing thing is that if just one particle in an entangled 
pair is measured, the wave function of both particles 
collapses into a definite state that is the same for both 
partners, even separated by great distances.

Among several proposed explanations of all this is the "many 
worlds" hypothesis:  the notion that for every possible 
pathway or state open to a particle, there is a separate 
universe.  For each of 10 possible pathways a quantum 
particle might follow, for example, there would exist a 
separate universe..."

"...The late Rockefeller University physicist Heinz Pagels, 
like many other theorists, believed that quantum physics is 
a kind of code that interconnects everything in the 
universe, including the physical basis of life itself.  In 
his book, "The Cosmic Code," Dr. Pagels, an ardent mountain 
climber, wrote:

'I often dream about falling.  Such dreams are commonplace 
to the ambitious or those who climb mountains.  Lately I 
dreamed I was clutching at the face of a rock, but it would 
not hold.  Gravel gave way, I grasped for a shrub, but it 
pulled loose, and in cold terror I fell into the abyss.

Suddenly I realized that my fall was relative; there was no 
bottom and no end.  A feeling of pleasure overcame me.  I 
realized that what I embody, the principle of life, cannot 
be destroyed.  It is written into the cosmic code, the order 
of the universe.  As I continued to fall in the dark void, 
embraced by the vault of the heavens, I sang to the beauty 
of the stars and made my peace with the darkness.'

In 1988 Dr. Pagels was killed in a climbing accident."
-----------------------------------------------

From Sun to Earth: Tracking a new storm

Space scientists who gathered last week at NASA's Goddard 
Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD., had but one goal: to 
hone their understanding of a solar eruption that sent a 
huge cloud of gas hurtling toward Earth last January.  In 
addition to grappling with the earlier data, however, the 
scientists found themselves dealing with a new event.

On April 7, the day before the meeting began, another large 
solar outburst blazed forth, blasting Earthward a blob of 
gas and magnetic energy at a speed of 1.6 million kilometers 
an hour.  Researchers called the resulting storm, which 
didn't reach Earth's vicinity until 3 days later, relatively 
mild.  There were no reports of problems with spacecraft or 
electric power outages on Earth.  Ground-based detectors, 
however, measured sizable increases in the energy of
electrons in Earth's ionosphere, and sky-watchers as far 
south as Boston were treated to a dazzling auroral display.

As they had for the January eruption, the researches relied 
on an armada of spacecraft to track the disturbance, known 
as a coronal mass ejection because it originates in the 
sun's outer atmosphere, or corona (SN: 2/1/97, p. 68).  This 
time, an ultraviolet camera aboard the SOHO spacecraft, 
which continuously monitors the sun, was in operation and 
researchers could view the disturbance deeper in the corona 
than ever before.

"If the last event was [captured] from cradle to grave, this 
one was from birth to grave," says Nicola Fox of Goddard.

Like the earlier outburst, which researchers classify as a 
magnetic cloud, the blob of material ejected on April 7 
forced the interplanetary magnetic field around it to point 
south, allowing it to dump energy efficiently into the 
oppositely oriented magnetic domain of Earth.

Despite similarities, the April event was much more complex, 
says Charles C. Goodrich of the University of Maryland at 
College Park. Researchers predicted, from January's records, 
that the material would strike Earth's vicinity late on 
April 9.  That night came and went, however, with no sign of 
the blob's arrival.

Scientists worried that they had miscalculated.  In fact, 
says Fox, the material had plowed into an unusually slow 
solar wind, the stream of charged particles blowing out from 
the sun.  The expanding blob "had to go through molasses to 
get to us," Fox says.

In addition. says Goodrich. this material does not qualify 
as a magnetic cloud because it abruptly switched the 
direction of its magnetic field and did not show a drop in 
temperature.

Curiously, he notes, the Wind craft, situated so that it 
detects solar disturbances about an hour before they get to 
Earth, recorded two large increases in the density of 
ionized gas.  One increase occurred about 3 p.m. eastern 
daylight time on April 10 and the other 10 hours later.  The 
researchers are currently examining the ground-based data 
for evidence of a double signal.  Goodrich speculates that 
the solar outburst may have separated into two independent 
blobs of gas or that, like an erupting volcano, the sun 
actually spewed two separate blasts of gas.

R. Cowen
-----------------------------------------------

VELIKOVSKY'S COMET VENUS (4)
By David Talbott
(dtalbott at teleport.com)

[EDITOR'S NOTE:  This continues Talbott's series of articles 
on the myth of the comet Venus.]

THE GREAT COMET

In seeking out the general patterns of the Mesoamerican 
Venus as serpent-dragon, we cannot fail to observe that our 
listed "cometary" symbols are not just present, but 
prominent, that they are enigmatically but self-evidently 
connected, that they do not direct us to any present forms 
either in the sky or in the natural world today (rather, 
they contradict all natural forms at every level), and that 
they remain unexplained, despite decades of microscopic 
examination by the best experts.

One conclusion is inescapable, even if interpretations will 
differ: the Mesoamerican symbolism of the planet Venus--in 
that planet's guise as serpent-dragon or chaos-monster--is a 
compendium of globally-recognized comet symbols, 
representing in one mythical form all five of the most 
frequently employed cometary glyphs! Yet in more than forty 
years since Velikovsky's _Worlds in Collision_, no 
mainstream scholar has even acknowledged this stunning fact.

Of course, no comet admitted by modern science has ever 
justified the lines of Shakespeare previously cited, or the 
Aztec image of a comet-like "weapon" in the form of a fiery 
dragon.  But our appreciation for the symbolism changes 
dramatically once we entertain a new possibility--that in 
earlier times mankind experienced a far more spectacular and 
devastating comet than ever experienced in more recent 
times, a cometary archetype that could fully account for the 
later symbols.  It was said of the great fire serpent 
Xiuhcoatl that it spewed forth comets.   That is exactly the 
language we should expect if Xiuhcoatl was not just a comet, 
but the parent of comets, the concrete source of a mythical 
archetype, from which arose the entire reservoir of comet 
images.  Every cometary apparition, taking its symbolism 
from the cosmic original, would then be considered a child 
of the primeval, flaming serpent or dragon remembered in the 
myths.

ON EVIDENCE AND LOGIC

In all of this there is a fundamental issue of logic.  How 
does one properly weigh the lines of evidence, the repeated 
convergence of comet words and symbols upon Venus?  Having 
had many opportunities to muse over the way the experts 
skirt the issue, I am convinced the real question never 
enters their minds.  Until one asks the question-did Venus 
formerly present itself as a spectacular "comet"?--even the 
most obvious evidence will be seen as something else, as 
confirmation of the recklessness and confusion of myth, 
another reason not to take myth seriously.  The question is 
not asked because the "Velikovskian" field of study lacks 
all credibility in the eyes of mainstream authorities.

Thus the Mayan scholar Peter Joralemon explained the highly 
unnatural convergence of symbols on the celestial dragon--

The primary concern of Olmec art is the representation of 
creatures that are biologically impossible.  Such 
mythological beings exist in the mind of man, not in the 
world of nature.

It's easy to see how one might draw this conclusion.  But if 
the symbolism lacks any roots in "the world of nature" and 
is simply the result of chaotic imagination, then an even 
greater issue arises: Why do the same symbols continually 
occur in juxtaposition?  Once the critic resorts to 
unbridled imagination as an explanation of highly specific 
forms, he is left with nothing but coincidence to account 
for the convergence.  But when it comes to the convergence 
of all five of the world's most common cometary symbols on 
one celestial creature, is it reasonable to expect sheer 
imagination and "coincidence" to account for the situation?

In truth, virtually all respected authorities continually 
look for natural references, because no one could seriously 
believe that such dramatic images as the plumed serpent 
could dominate an entire civilization without a link to 
natural experience.  Only the rarest of specialists would 
suggest that the primitive mind conjured its primary 
mythical forms out of a wholesale denial of the world.  In 
truth, if they can find even the most remote natural 
explanation, the experts will use it.  Miguel León-Portilla, 
for example, offers a picturesque explanation of the Venus-
Quetzalcoatl relationship--

The association of Venus and Quetzalcoatl can probably be
attributed to the fact that when this planet sets upon 
the moving waters of the Pacific, its reflection seems 
not unlike a serpent with brilliant scales and plumes.

Here is a "natural explanation" that would fit easily into 
Bob Forrest's analysis, as if there is nothing in the plumed 
serpent crying out for a comparison with the highly 
improbable yet similar images of other peoples--and as if 
the combined cometary associations need not concern us.

How, then, does one break through the vicious circle?  Go 
back to the list of the five most frequently-employed comet 
images, each of them occurring not only in Mexico but in the 
global symbolism of the comet.  How does one weigh the fact 
that all five comet glyphs are attached to the Mexican 
Venus? Indeed not only the general motifs, but virtually all 
of the listed variations are attached to Venus.  Is sheer 
coincidence even possible in such an extreme case as this?

For starters, it needs to be understood that we are not 
dealing with a "multiple choice" when it comes to possible 
interpretations. If one is permitted to include in the 
lexicon of comets the "shooting star," whose mythical image 
is drawn from the same reservoir, then the only known and 
provable celestial phenomenon called a "long-haired star" is 
a comet; the only celestial phenomenon known to have been 
called a torch star or a flaming star is a comet; the only 
celestial phenomenon known to have been represented as a 
star with streaming "tail feathers" is a comet.  The only 
celestial phenomenon known to have been represented as a 
star with a serpentine tail is a comet.  That these very 
glyphs are consistently attached to Venus cannot be 
explained away by ad hoc reasoning.

Now add the mythical role of the comet as the ascending soul 
of a former great king, together with the explicit role of 
Venus as the ascending soul of the prototypical king 
Quetzalcoatl, and you will begin to see what is at issue 
here.  If nothing else the stunning convergence of cometary 
images should make clear that Humboldt's guess about the 
"smoking star" Venus and a local volcano is not a sufficient 
answer! The juxtaposition of cometary motifs with the now-
peaceful planet--a planet whose appearance today could not 
begin to explain these associations--forces us to confront 
the logical alternative: if Venus did appear as a comet, the 
entire assembly of improbable "coincidences" disappears.

THE MYTH OF THE COMET VENUS

To establish the coincidence of cometary themes relating to 
Venus is not to end the subject, but simply to open the door 
to a new vantage point, one in which the researcher enjoys 
the freedom to consider unusual possibilities.  Do the Aztec 
and Mayan codices, the inscriptions on stone, the oral 
histories, and the towering monuments speak for events no 
longer occurring in the skies?

The unexpected symbolic parallels give the researcher a new 
way of perceiving his subject.  Grant the possibility of a 
world-threatening comet Venus--frightening enough and 
destructive enough to substantiate man1s deepest fears--and 
the culture will no longer look the same. Re-envisioning the 
ancient world in this way will not remove the role of magic 
and superstition in the myths; nor will it soften the 
profoundly barbaric components of native rituals; nor will 
it give to the myths and rites that loftier wisdom we so 
often seek in ancient words.  What it will do is lend the 
missing perspective, providing new frameworks for 
understanding the experiential roots of the culture.

The candid researcher must first admit that even the most 
capable authorities, when considering the core of pre-
Columbian thought and culture, find that convincing 
explanations elude them.  Can modern scholars, for example, 
really claim to understand the cloud of anxiety that hung 
over Mexican cultures, an anxiety only heightened by the 
arrival of the Spaniards?  Nothing in that civilization's 
monumental splendor could hide this apprehension.  But to 
expose its roots the researcher must be willing to follow 
the clues, rather than dismiss them just because they seem 
so out of touch with the world we know.  These clues will 
lead--inescapably--past the cover of cultural anxiety to its 
roots in celestial terror.

The sensitive chronicler, Fray Diego Duran, writing just a 
generation after Columbus, recounted a story about the great 
emperor Moctezuma, concerning an experience prior to arrival 
of the conquistadors.  It happened that Moctezuma had 
received word of a comet hanging over Mexico at sunrise.  
Though the report did not come from his personal 
astrologers, "he was so filled with fear that he thought his 
death would arrive within the hour."  Moctezuma then asked 
the king of neighboring Texcoco to tell him what the comet 
meant.

The answer was as Moctezuma must have feared--

It is an ill-omen for our kingdoms; terrible, frightful 
things will come upon them.  In all our lands and 
provinces there will be great calamities and misfortunes, 
not a thing will be left standing.  Death will dominate 
the land!  All our dominion will be lostŠ

On hearing this news, Moctezuma--

wept bitterly, saying "O Lord of All Created Things!  O 
mighty gods who gives life or death!  Why have you 
decreed that many kings shall have reigned proudly but 
that my fate is to witness the unhappy destruction of 
Mexico?"

It would be senseless to attempt to isolate or explain 
Moctezuma's fears outside a cultural tradition far more 
telling than the individual biographies of kings.  No king  
in earlier times could free himself from the mythical and 
ritual contexts of kingship.  And in the overarching symbols 
of the power and fate of kings one encounters invariably the 
archaic language of the comet.  Of the comet in Moctezuma's 
day, Duran's modern translators write: "Šit is curious to 
note that the Aztecs looked upon comets as ill omens, just 
as the contemporary Europeans regarded them as signs of war, 
famine and pestilence."   Among the Aztecs, "Comets and 
earthquakes, which were always carefully marked down each 
year in the hieroglyphic manuscripts, were always considered 
omens of misfortune," notes Jacques Soustell.

In our investigation we have grouped comet and meteor 
symbolism together because mythically the two are 
synonymous.  "Comets are referred to in Quiché [highlands 
Maya] as uje ch1umil, 'tail of the star,' and are considered 
omens of massive pestilence," observes Barbara Tedlock.  
"Throughout the Mayan area, meteors are thought to be evil 
omens forecasting sickness, war, and death."

The Mesoamerican theme resonates with a global fear that no 
comparative study can ignore: around the world, the comet 
signaled the approach of doomsday.   And it mattered not how 
quietly and unobtrusively the visitor made its appearance, 
because the archetypal image did not originate in the little 
wisps of gas that periodically adorn our sky.  With the 
rarest of exceptions, the cometary _omen_ was _ominous_ (the 
two English words being derived from the same Latin root).  
For the ancient stargazers, the comet was the fear-inspiring 
portent of disaster, the "ill-omened star".  And thus does 
our word _dis-aster_ (evil star) echo the ancient fear of a 
star (comet) presiding over universal _catastrophe_ (another 
word reflecting the evil aster or star, the comet of world 
mythology).   But this brief note on language of the evil 
star does not even scratch the surface when it comes to the 
depth of man1s memory of a world-ending cometary disaster.
----------------------------------------------

PLEASE VISIT THE KRONIA COMMUNICATIONS WEBSITE--

http://www.kronia.com/~kronia/

Other suggested Web site URL's for more information about 
Catastrophics:

http://www.ames.net/aeon/
http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/sis/
http://www.flash.net/~cjransom/
http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/velikovskian/
http://www.access.digex.net/~medved/Catastrophism.html
http://www.grazian-archive.com/
http://www.tcel.com/~mike/paper.html
http://nt.e-z.net/mikamar/default.html
-----------------------------------------------

The THOTH electronic newsletter is an outgrowth of 
scientific and scholarly discussions in the emerging field 
of astral catastrophics. Our initial focus will be on a 
reconstruction of ancient astral myths and symbols in 
relation to a new theory of planetary history.  Serious 
readers must allow some time for these radically different 
ideas to be fleshed out and for the relevant background to 
be developed.  The general tenor of the ideas and 
information presented in THOTH is supported by the editor 
and publisher, but there will always be plenty of room for 
differences of interpretation.

We welcome your comments and responses.

New readers are referred to earlier installments in issues 
of THOTH posted on the Kronia website listed above.  Go to 
the THOTH page and click on the image titled "Thoth: the 
Egyptian God of Knowledge" to access the back issues.

Michael Armstrong
Mikamar Publishing
mikamar at e-z.net