THOTH A Catastrophics Newsletter VOL II, No. 18 Nov 15, 1998 EDITOR: Amy Acheson PUBLISHER: Michael Armstrong LIST MANAGER: Brian Stewart CONTENTS SEAGULLS AND SCIENTISTS . . . . . . . . . . by Amy Acheson THE WARRING GODDESS ATHENA . . . . . . . . . .Dave Talbott PEER REVIEW AND CATASTROPHICS from the Kronia-list and SIS Review SPACECRAFT NEARS ASTEROID ORBIT . . . . . . by Paul Recer comments by Wal Thornhill discussion with the Kronia-list ---------------------------------------------- SEAGULLS AND SCIENTISTS by Amy Acheson On a beach, seagulls wade in tide pools. When they come across a crab or clam, they fly up twenty feet or so and drop it on the rocks. Then they dive down to claim the tender morsel inside the shattered shell. Half a mile inland, another flock of seagulls have gathered on a lawn. They peck in the grass beneath a crabapple tree (an appropriate label.) And when they come across a crabapple, they carry it into the air and drop it on the street, then dive down to claim the smashed apple. Watching them, I'm tempted to say, "Good grief! What a bunch of bird-brains." And yet, how is what the seagulls are doing different from what scientists do? They're applying what they know to a situation that is unfamiliar. A crab is small and hard and red. It breaks open into something tasty when they drop it. Maybe the small, hard, red apple will, too. People do the same when they apply the concepts they are familiar with to the objects beyond their reach. Thus they once thought of the sun as a campfire (and worried: will it run out of wood?) After they invented the wheel, they saw the sun as a fiery chariot (and wondered: who controls the horses?) [Or was it the other way 'round? They saw the gods' great wheel and invented the chariot?] Much more recently, we've learned a little about nuclear fusion, so the majority of astronomers support the hypothesis that the sun is a gravitating fusion factory, with a few magnetic anomalies that still need to be explained (new worries: where are those missing neutrinos?) The Electric Universe is no different. We're taking a concept that's become familiar (the behavior of electrical forces in a plasma lab) and testing how well they apply to those tiny specks of light in the sky, the moon, planets, stars, galaxies and beyond. This paradigm is exciting. It holds the promise of explaining hot coronas and missing neutrinos, craters and rilles, human mythology, and maybe even galactic redshift. It's worth exploring, even if its not the final answer but only another step along the way to understanding the universe. In my opinion, these Electric Apples are tastier than the crabs they're eating on Fusion Beach. It remains to be seen whether they're as nutritious. Amy Acheson thoth at whidbey.com ---------------------------------------------- THE WARRING GODDESS ATHENA By Dave Talbott (dtalbott at teleport.com) As a follow-up to the previous discussion of James Fitton, I shall attempt to illustrate a principle of methodology.. How does one evaluate the explanatory power of the Saturn theory in the concrete terms we have suggested? Since Fitton criticized Velikovsky for claiming the Greek Athena was Venus, I will employ this goddess as our test case, though any well-documented goddess figure could be approached in the same way. Our reference for now is a "snapshot" of the Saturnian configuration on the Kronia Communications website. Go to the page on the "Saturn theory" at- www.kronia.com This snapshot resolves a more complex, evolving planetary configuration into a single glimpse, taken from our notebook, "Symbols of an Alien Sky". Our subject is the central "star" of Venus, seen in the center of the gas giant Saturn, with luminous streamers radiating from Venus to spread visually across the much larger sphere of Saturn. In our previous discussion, I presented a list of mythical attributes attached to this unique form of Venus. It is my contention not only that these forms are essential to the Venus or goddess- archetype, but that no comprehension of the archetype is even possible apart from the explicit contexts suggested in this illustration. These contexts include, 1) CENTRALITY in relationship to another body remembered as the universal sovereign, 2) Comet-like STREAMERS exploding into light as the Sun set and the surrounding sky darkened, and 3) the appearance of a darker or reddish smaller body in front of (i.e., visually inside) the sphere of Venus, this body being identifiable through comparative analysis as the planet Mars, the archetypal warrior-hero. The primary mythical forms (among a larger list of secondary symbols) are: 1) Great Star, Great Comet 2) Long-haired, fiery-haired goddess 3) Radiant heart, soul, or "life" of the primeval sun or universal sovereign god (Saturn) 4) Visible glory, radiance, majesty, splendor, power, or strength of the primeval sun 5) Nave (hub) and spokes of the "sun" wheel (Saturn's wheel) 7) Radiant eye of the "sun"; eye with streaming "tears" 8) Rayed crown worn by the warrior-hero (Mars) 9) Feathered headdress worn by the warrior-hero 10) Shield or protection of the warrior-hero For the sake of focus in the limited space allowed here, we'll look at two motifs - number 7 and number 10 - to illustrate the comparative test. Then, in our next submission, we'll show the crucial connections to the other symbolic forms. THE EYE GODDESS. It seems that around the world ancient races identified the planet Venus as "the Eye," or "Great Eye," though the speck of light we know as Venus today does not stand in relation to another body in any way that might suggest a central eye. (On considering our illustration of Venus in relation to Saturn, however, the most common statement we receive from people is, "That looks like an eye!") In fact, the Sumerian Inanna and Akkadian Ishtar, both identified with Venus, are the commonly acknowledged prototypes of the famous "eye goddesses" whose influence reached as far as northern Europe. (A good introduction is OGS Crawford's classic work, THE EYE GODDESS.) On the other side of the world, the Maya knew Venus as _Nohoch Ich_ "Great Eye." In the Hervey Islands of the Pacific, Venus was called _Tamatanui_, the "eye of Tane" (ancestral great king). The ancient Chinese term for Venus is connected with a root meaning "Eye of the Ancestor." (This information came to me from Eric Miller, who spent many years investigating Chinese imagery of Venus.) And the Ringa-Ringaroo of Australia remembered the planet Venus as _Mimungoona_, "The Big Eye". This widespread identity of Venus as the "eye" is surely the key to understanding why the Egyptian goddesses Isis, Hathor, Sekhmet, and others commonly identified with the Mediterranean Astarte/Aphrodite/ Venus were invoked throughout ancient Egypt as "the Eye of Ra". More specifically, as I have noted elsewhere, the Egyptian language implies a SMALLER orb appearing squarely in the center of a LARGER sphere. The texts describe the Eye shining "with splendors on the forehead of Ra". (The "splendors" of the Eye must be understood in substantive terms, as the streamers radiating from central orb; see #4 above.) It is also worth noting that the respected Egyptologist Rudolf Anthes investigated the Egyptian Eye-motif in great detail, concluding that the Eye goddess was the planet Venus. Of course, he drew this conclusion without the benefit of the global comparative analysis which secures the case beyond any reasonable doubt. Immanuel Velikovsky, in identifying Athena with Venus, never discussed the eye motif, but the very presence of such an unusual theme attached to Venus can hardly be ignored in an investigation of the Greek goddess. There are at least four epithets of Athena which are suggestive of the connection to the eye goddess. Athena is the "flashing-eyed", the "strong-eyed", the "owl- eyed" (or bright-eyed) and the "Gorgon-eyed", Are these epithets to be taken as loose metaphors, whose precise meaning has been lost over time? Or are they echoes of an ancient theme (EYE-goddess), which the experts on Athena have missed? In his DESCRIPTION OF GREECE (3.18.2), Pausanias gives a form of Athena as _Ophthalmitis_ "Goddess of the Eye". That alone should give us a strong indication of the connection to the worldwide theme of Venus as central Eye. Obviously we cannot here pursue all of the leads, but let us simply take one, that of Athena as Glaukopis, the "owl-eyed" goddess. Will comparative analysis give us grounds for connecting this Athena epithet to the attributes of the more widespread Eye goddess? In "Symbols of an Alien Sky", I have noted that the general trend of symbolism over time was toward increasingly naturalistic representation. And thus, in the course of giving the central eye-star a human form (as goddess), the symbolists DUPLICATED it, since single eyes do not occur in nature. Put two pictographs of the Venus-eye together, and you have the beginnings of anthropomorphic representation, a trend which can be easily documented. But something else happens. The "head" of the goddess so represented takes on a strange resemblance to an "owl" ("Symbols", pages 90-91). As shown by Marija Gimbutas and others, the ancient eye goddess does, in fact, pass into the figure of an "owl" goddess. From eye goddess to owl goddess: nothing more is needed in order to explain the owl-eyed Athene, a goddess who was also REPRESENTED by, or as, an owl, One such representation of the "owl of Athena" is given on page 91. Note that the form of the owl-eyes is precisely that which we have given as the original eye- star of Venus. Of course, to the experts, this aspect of Athene seems to bear no connection to the other attributes of the goddess. If our hypothesis is correct, that will be because these specialists have yet to discern the connection between the later symbol and the celestial object originally symbolized. Such regional symbols DO NOT EXPLAIN THEMSELVES, but are explained in the most concrete way by the hypothesized celestial form, as it is reflected in evolving symbolic patterns. THE SHIELD GODDESS Of all the symbols of Athena, none is more prominent than the AEGIS, the famous "shield" on which artists frequently portrayed the head of the Gorgon Medusa, with which Athena herself is so intimately associated. Is it possible, then, that there is a simple, but unrecognized connection between the "owl-eyed" Athena and the "Gorgon-eyed" Athena? In the general tradition, the central star of Venus and its effusion of "radiance" was the protection of the warrior-hero (Mars), who is represented by the innermost orb in the pictographs under discussion. You see this, for example, in the role of Egyptian goddesses as "the Great Protectress". To stand inside the radiant eye (goddess) was to find the unassailable position. Thus, Egyptian texts proclaim, " He is Horus encircled with the protection of his Eye". "My refuge is my Eye, my protection is my Eye". But while Egyptologists acknowledge the identity of Eye and goddess, they have nothing to tell us about the meaning of this enigmatic language. What, then, was the "protection" enjoyed by the hero, when he occupied that desired position INSIDE the eye? It was nothing other than the jetting of luminous or "fiery" material outward, presenting the appearance of explosive, UNAPPROACHABLE streams. Of the Egyptian Eye goddess Sekhmet, the texts declare, "It is a flame which drives away on its account....No one at all can approach her, the streams behind her are flames of fire." (The streams stretch up the polar axis BEHIND Venus.) Similarly, The Sumerian "Exaltation of Inanna" speaks of those "who dare not proceed before [Inanna's] terrible countenance". The texts depict the goddess "clothed in radiance." And it was said that the world stood in "fear and trembling at [her] tempestuous radiance." In considering these images, I trust the reader will appreciate why translators, despite the power and explicitness of the images, do not take them seriously - they simply find NO REFERENCE FOR THEM in our sky today. On our earth, great warriors represented this protective function by duplicating the image on their shields. I have given an example on page 92, which shows all of the hypothesized components and precisely replicates both the Eye-goddess pictographs and the eye form of the "owl of Athena" on the previous page. The innermost orb will mean the warrior hero (Mars), protected by the blazing radiance of the central star or "comet". All that is needed in an investigation of this sort is that one uncover the underlying forms. No selectivity is required in order to take the tests in one direction (eye motif), or another direction (shield motif). One will either find the precise form predicted by the model, or one will find something else, thereby challenging the model as a unified theory. [As a footnote I should mention that Ev Cochrane has sent to me a few notes on the Athena-eye connection. Until I received these notes, I did not know that Athena was called Eriopis ("strong eyed") or Gorgopis ("Gorgon- eyed"). As it turns out, both epithets will figure crucially in our next installment, dealing with the eye as the power or "strength" of the primeval sun (#4 in our list of symbols above) and as the head of the feminine chaos monster (Gorgon/Medusa) in an unstable phase of the configuration.] ---------------------------------------------- PEER REVIEW AND CATASTRPHICS from the Kronia-list and SIS Review The last place to look for controversial experiments supporting a new paradigm is in peer reviewed scientific literature. Peer review is censorship by consensus. It is precisely because science is about consensus and not truth that we have scientific revolutions. So if you want to be a revolutionary you have to be prepared to lose sight of the shores of certainty and trust your own judgement and navigation. (For an antidote to scientific certainty, I recommend: "The Golem: What Everyone should know about Science", by Harry Collins & Trevor Pinch). Wal Thornhill >From the latest SIS Chronology & Catastrophism Review 1998:1, p.55 ____________ A member of the audience cited his personal experience when he sought to have a paper on the inaccuracies of radiocarbon dating published in that bastion of the establishment, Antiquity. After being turned down, he persisted and managed to obtain the two referees' reports. One said there was no evidence to say that radiocarbon dating was wrong, so he had not bothered to read the paper. The other obviously read as far as page 1, where a reference was made to James's Centuries of Darkness. He then criticised that because it did not treat any other civilisation, only Egypt. Clearly the referee had not even bothered to read Centuries of Darkness. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ You can draw your own conclusions. Ian Tresman ---------------------------------------------- News item 9th November 1998: SPACECRAFT NEARS ASTEROID ORBIT By PAUL RECER IN THE week before Christmas, some 262 million kilometres from Earth, the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) spacecraft will fire its rockets to begin a manoeuvre designed to make it the first man-made object to orbit an asteroid. Andy Cheng, project scientist for NEAR, said the craft would begin orbiting the Eros asteroid on January 10, 1999. In the following months it would be lowered to orbit just 34km above the asteroid to analyse its composition, magnetic field and mass. Eros is about the size of a mountain, 38km by 13km. Its orbit routinely carries it close to the orbit of Earth. Scientists don't know if the rock is solid or if it is a highly porous body with empty cavities or chunks of ice. Like most asteroids, said Cheng, Eros probably formed early in the history of the solar system, either as part of a bigger planet or as a lone object. After months in orbit, researchers may attempt to put the craft on to the surface of Eros. Cheng said the spacecraft was not designed to land, but that is one option the researchers are considering. The density of Eros is unknown, but the asteroid is so small that its gravity force will be only a fraction of Earth's, making landing there less violent. But it would still be tricky steering the craft to a touchdown because Eros is so far away that it takes 45 minutes for a radio signal to make a round trip journey between the Earth and NEAR. Associated Press Comments by WAL THORNHILL: The NEAR spacecraft is due to rendezvous with the 14km by 38km mountain of an asteroid, EROS, in January next year. The notion of "landing" on the asteroid is being considered. It is not known what to expect. Is it made of ice, rubble or green cheese? The nebular theory of the formation of solid objects in the solar system is absurd. It creates ten new problems for every "solution" it provides. I expect therefore that the composition of the asteroid will deviate from expectations based on assumed primordial isotopic ratios. Like the astronomer Tom Van Flandern, I believe it was once a part of a planet. It will be constituted like a planetary mountain. It may even show signs of igneous activity or sedimentary stratification. That would give the space geologists a headache! However, unlike Tom who believes that a former planet exploded, I predict that it will show signs of its electrical birth. That birth occurred as a normal effect of interplanetary discharges following a close approach of two planets. Most likely, it is a fragment of the 2 million cubic kilometres missing from the Valles Marineris on Mars. Mars was renowned of old for his entourage of flaming meteors. As part of the electrical birth process, the asteroid will have been struck by plasma discharges These produce characteristically neat, circular craters and a melted glassy deposit in the centre of many - unlike impacts but like those found by astronauts in small craters on the Moon. Also, like other asteroids, it may exhibit a somewhat "blackened and burnt in an oven" appearance. Its isotopic composition should have the signature of its parent planet, altered on the surface by ion implantation and nuclear transformations caused by powerful cosmic lightning. Attempts to determine the density and bulk composition of the asteroid from its apparent gravity will likely give results inconsistent with the surface composition. Maybe they will need to postulate a dense iron core to make up the difference in observed densities between the surface material and the entire object - just as they do with planets and large moons! Any attempt to land the NEAR spacecraft on the asteroid runs the risk of electrical discharges on touchdown which could damage the craft's electronics unless precautions have been taken. Of course, the longer the spacecraft orbits the asteroid the less this danger will be because the solar wind plasma has a limited ability to slowly equalise the voltages of the two objects while in close proximity. As an aside: with the idea of landing a spacecraft on an asteroid and all of the recent worry about Near Earth Objects, or NEO's, possibly the best way of moving a NEO into a non-threatening orbit is to make it an artificial comet by charging or discharging the object. Some of NASA's new ion propulsion units modified to emit a charged beam and planted on the NEO surface might be good for the job. The thrust would be totally inadequate to change the asteroid's orbit appreciably. However, it would change the electrical charge on the NEO which in turn would alter its gravity and, as a consequence, shift its orbit. This is precisely what happens to comets as they emit jets of ions and change their orbits in a non-Newtonian manner. It is conventionally "explained" by poorly defined non-gravitational forces. Wal Thornhill Karen Tackett asks: Do you know if there is any plans to attempt an orbital diversion of an NEO (before we HAVE to do it)? It's disconcerting to think that "they" might let one of those slam into earth before admitting that the idea you expressed here might be worth a try. Wal says: So far as we know, no NEO's presently threaten the Earth. Anyway I'm not convinced that NEO's pose the threat to the Earth that astronomers think they do. I'm sure that one of the reasons for the NEAR mission is to get an idea of how easy it would be to disrupt an asteroid. Right now though, unless the military crazies have a plan, I don't know of any planned mission to blow up a NEO to show it can be done. On the CD [_The Electric Universe_ by Wallace Thornhill, latest edition available soon] I mention the present millennial preoccupation with Doomsday due to the imagined threat of a NEO. I point out that the effects are quite different from those expected because electrical effects are ignored and misunderstood. In fact the Earth has its own "anti-ballistic" system built in so the perceived need for us to intervene may be a product of our faulty science. Mr. M. wrote: So you predict its isotopic composition should resemble Mars'? Wal replies: Yes, if its parent was Mars. The bulk isotopic composition will reflect that of its parent. This means that eventually we may be able to identify both the players and their rough positions in the solar system at the time of past catastrophes. We can do this by associating the asteroids in a given family (I believe there have been 4 distinct families of asteroids identified) with their parent planets. I feel that the asteroid belt indicates the general area where the final breakup of the Saturnian system took place. Since then Saturn has relaxed back to its distant orbit where it has established a new electrogravitic equilibrium. >Wal wrote (previously): >> >>As part of the electrical birth process, the asteroid will have >>been struck by plasma discharges. These produce >>characteristically neat, circular craters and a melted glassy >>deposit in the centre of many - unlike impacts but like those >>found by astronauts in small craters on the Moon. Mr. M. asked: Are there any craters on earth that have melted glassy deposits in the centre? Wal replies: Ordinary lightning can create fulgurites (melted sand) in very dry soil. The detailed form of electrical scarring on a solid object's surface depends upon a myriad factors. For example, both the Earth and it seems, Europa, have a surface which is basically of highly conductive salty water. It will not crater but distribute charge globally in a very efficient manner. On Europa the current carrying channels have been preserved in a frozen state. On Earth, there may be little trace because the conductor is a liquid. I chose the Moon as an example because it has extreme dryness and no atmosphere - like an asteroid. Because the Earth is a wet planet, the heat generated in an electrical cratering episode tends to create an excavated, explosive crater with shock metamorphosis of the central cone and little melting of the floor. Note that the arc does not impinge on the centre of the crater but rather moves in a circle or tight, expanding spiral about the centre. [Note ... : since repeating the anode cratering experiments here and videotaping them, I have changed my opinion on the direction of the spiral action of the arc. I now can show that it is from the centre outwards. On reflection, that makes perfect sense]. On the dry Moon this creates a flat, melted floor with terraces on the very steep walls of the crater and melted floors on some terraces. In some notable instances it creates corkscrew shaped craters! My new CD, The Electric Universe, features video clips of experiments which help to graphically explain some of the differences in cratering effects. Of course, the work has not yet been attempted by professional geologists to look at this new interpretation of so-called impact craters. Unfortunately, they will first have to see it happening before they are likely to believe it possible. Jupiter's moon Io will someday provide the proof by example because it is happening there continually. >Wal wrote: > >> Also, like >>other asteroids, it may exhibit a somewhat "blackened and burnt >>in an oven" appearance. Its isotopic composition should have >>the signature of its parent planet, altered on the surface by >>ion implantation and nuclear transformations caused by powerful >>cosmic lightning. Mr. M. queried: So its isotopic composition *won't* resemble Mars'? Or we won't be able to tell its isotopic composition? Wal replies: The bulk isotopic composition of the asteroid should match precisely some scarred area of its parent body, be it Mars or another planet or moon. A difficulty may arise from the fact that the composition of the asteroid will be judged from its exposed surface. Now, chondritic meteorites exhibit anomalous isotopic composition on the surface of the melted chondrules. As I have explained in detail on the CD, this is likely to be due to ion implantation etc. So I expect the same effect to be evident on larger bodies that were born in the same event as the meteorites. Without taking a cored sample from the asteroid (not in the NEAR program) we won't know for sure. Mr. M. asks: How does lightning transmute elements? Dave Talbott wrote something about lightning turning oxygen into sulphur. He said it was your idea so I'll ask you about it: This process liberates a lot of energy, but requires temperatures on the order of billions of degrees. How does your model overcome the Coulomb Barrier? What happens to the excess energy? Wal replies: Cosmic lightning (quite distinct from the puny sparks in our atmosphere) is perfectly energetic enough to transmute elements. The problem comes about when physicists talk of the temperature required to initiate nuclear fusion, usually in the tens of millions degrees (not billions). Temperature is a measure of the energy of random motion of atoms. But the energy in an electric discharge is highly directional - in other words, non-random. The concept of temperature does not apply in this circumstance. That is why we routinely use powerful electric and magnetic fields in our nuclear laboratories to overcome the coulomb barrier and initiate nuclear reactions. (My CD also discusses low energy transmutation of elements). Astrophysicists have painted themselves into a theoretical corner because they ignore the possibility of electrical discharge phenomena in plasma. It is not even taught as part of the postgraduate astrophysics plasma physics course in leading universities. Instead they talk of energetic "magnetic reconnection events" in plasma. These are a magical theoretical construct to avoid recognising them for what they really are - sites of electric discharges. I use the word "magical" because there is no physical meaning to, or demonstration of the notion that magnetic field lines can perform the trick of breaking and reconnecting. The excess energy from the oxygen to sulphur "fritting" is released as radiant energy in the plasmoid, rather like (or probably the same as in) ball lightning. Notice that interplanetary lightning is in a form similar to ball lightning and travels between planets like "a coal spat from a fire", according to eyewitnesses. If the transmutation takes place on a surface then the energy would contribute to melting and blast effects. The reddish colouration of the levees on the larger channels on Europa I have attributed to conversion of oxygen from the water there to sulphur. It was created by the lightning which streaked across the surface, ripping giant furrows through the ice. Oxygenated compounds on the surface of Io are being converted continually to sulphur by Jovian electric arcs giving the pizza look to the electric moon. And Mars, which had much more water in the recent past, has a sulphur rich "duricrust" to its soil which is the result of conversion of oxygen from that water to sulphur by cosmic lightning. Wal Thornhill ---------------------------------------------- PLEASE VISIT THE KRONIA COMMUNICATIONS WEBSITE: http://www.kronia.com Other suggested Web site URL's for more information about Catastrophics: Subscriptions to AEON, a journal of myth and science, may be ordered at the I-net address below: 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/ Immanuel Velikovsky Reconsidered, 10 Pensée Journals may be ordered at the I-net address below: 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 focus is 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 issues of THOTH posted on the Kronia website listed above. Go to the free newsletter page and double click on the image of Thoth, the Egyptian God of Knowledge, to access the back issues.