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 II, No. 20 Dec 31, 1998 EDITOR: Amy Acheson PUBLISHER: Michael Armstrong LIST MANAGER: Brian Stewart CONTENTS SOMETHING NEW UNDER A DIFFERENT SUN . . . . . . . . .Amy Acheson THE "TERRIFYING GLORY" OF VENUS. . . . . . . .. . . Dave Talbott CATASTROPHICS TESTIMONIALS. . . . . . . . . . . Various Kronians ERUPTION OR CAPTURE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kronia Discussion INTERPLANETARY ELECTRIC FUSION . . . . . . . . . . Wal Thornhill ---------------------------------------------- SOMETHING NEW UNDER A DIFFERENT SUN by Amy Acheson A paradigm shift is like making a U-turn on a highway. You're still travelling the same road (life, learning), but everything you thought of as "left" becomes "right". You see the other side of buildings and trees along the way. Everything is the same, yet different. Under the Saturnian paradigm, even everyday expressions can have startlingly different meanings. Phrases like "in a different light", "something new under the sun", or "it dawned on me" evoke images of an alien sky with an entirely different sun than the one we're accustomed to. The new viewpoints can be exciting. They can be scary. They can take years to develop, or they can come into focus in the blink of an eye. But always, it seems, there is still another insight lurking around the next corner. For myself, being involved with the Kronia group over the past two years has brought a number of sudden personal paradigm shifts. The first was at the Portland Conference in '97 when, in answer to a question I don't remember, Dave Talbott, Dwardu Cardona, and Ev Cochrane all agreed, "There were no stars visible from earth during the time of the polar configuration." The night sky I'd always taken for granted was obliterated with a shining nebulosity. The second came at the Seattle workshop when Wal Thornhill juxtaposed slides of the polar configuration and comet Shoemaker-Levi-9, illustrating that the polar configuration is not astronomically impossible. A third was when Dave Talbott shifted my vision of the flood myths in a post to the K-list: "[I]n all likelihood, the outpouring of cometary material associated with the 'deluge' involved a descent of a horrendous cloud of ice on the Earth, helping to prompt the mythical interpretation. But the mythical figure who rides out the storm of the deluge is, beyond question, a celestial player in the original story." Today I can't even walk along the beach on a sunny day without noticing that the gravitating nuclear fusion factory that once warmed my back has become an electrical arc in the sky. It's more stimulating than espresso; it's more satisfying than sex; it's more challenging than Everest ... and I wonder what insights the New Year will bring? There is something new under the sun. Even the sun is new. Amy Acheson thoth at whidbey.com ---------------------------------------------- THE "TERRIFYING GLORY" OF VENUS By Dave Talbott (dtalbott at teleport.com) In our prior installment on the Greek goddess Athena, we noted two relationships of the goddess under the tests of our planetary model: the connection to the ancient eye-goddess, and the connection to the "shield" in which the warrior-hero finds his protection. Our purpose was to illustrate how an independent researcher might follow the logical tests of the Saturn model in any direction. Given the specificity of the model itself, the tests leave little room for ambiguity or selective perception. They are also virtually limitless. And each poses the same question: would these deeply connected memories be possible if the claimed events never occurred? In this brief series, our reference has been a "snapshot" of the Saturnian configuration on the Kronia Communications website. You will find the illustration at- www.kronia.com/html/saturn_theory.html A more general background is provided by the notebook "Symbols of an Alien Sky", to which we have frequently referred in this series. Before moving on, I shall offer a few more observations concerning Athena's equation with the central "star" of Venus depicted in the illustration. In this phase of the evolving configuration, Venus stands visually in the center of the gas giant Saturn, discharging luminous streams of material in every direction. In reference to this phase, I listed these testable mythical forms of Venus-- 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 While conventional understanding would see only irreconcilable natural and man-made objects behind these symbolic forms, our model implies that, despite their seeming differences, each and every one refers us back to the SAME form in the sky. Of course this would be inconceivable were no external reference present to inspire the wide range of mythical interpretations. Hence, if it can be confirmed that all of listed symbols DO explicitly refer to the form we have illustrated, the logical case for its presence in the ancient sky is settled. For this reason, in discussion of the hypothesized configuration, I have continually emphasized the concreteness of the ancient images. Consider, for example, items three and four in our list. What was meant by the "life" of the ancient sun? And what was the "power" or "glory" of the sun, so often invoked in ancient sources? Lacking any concrete references, even the best scholars have failed to notice the libraries of evidence bearing directly on the question. The "life" - the "heart" and "soul" - of the ancient sun god is a GODDESS. And not a goddess in the abstract, but in the precise form of a radiant star drawn in the center of a larger circle or sphere. You can see this for yourself - and abundantly so - in the birthplace of astronomy. The Babylonian goddess Ishtar, who gave "life" to the gods (and symbolically to the ruling king), was the planet Venus. Her star was not located in an ambiguous "sky", but precisely in the center of the great wheel of Shamash, the "sun" god, identified by Babylonian astronomers as the planet Saturn. But what was meant by the "life"-giving attribute of the goddess? Allow ancient words and images to mean what they say, and its significance is clear. It means the luminous material steaming outward to visually animate the larger sphere of Saturn. ("Symbols of an Alien Sky," pp 81 ff. Here Wal Thornhill's model of the electrically discharging Venus is vital!). In the daily cycle, as the sky darkened, these streams exploded into light, "bringing to life" the sun god and the celestial theater as a whole. The effusive streamers WERE the "life" of the sun god, to whom the goddess was so intimately linked. Remove the central star and you are, in fact, looking at the mythical "death" of the sovereign power, when his heart and soul departed from him to take on a much different appearance. Indeed, this very idea - the departure of the heart-soul - emphasizes how quickly the acid tests expand the domain of evidence, no matter where one starts an investigation. We are not just dealing with static forms, but sequences of events as well. So we should expect to find the same critical sequence apparent in all of the images we have listed above. A considerable field of evidence will tell us what happened to the streamers of the discharging Venus when the planet was removed from its collinear position They became chaotic, undulating, or serpentine, presenting the terrifying countenance of Venus as the lamenting or violent goddess, raging in the sky with wildly disheveled hair. That is, in fact, the core identity of Venus in the period of cosmic upheaval, following the "death" of the universal sovereign. Of course volumes could, and have, been written on the raging goddess, but we must limit ourselves to just one example here, the one which would appear to be the LEAST tangible and most ambiguous of the listed images, I refer to item four: "Visible glory, radiance, majesty, splendor, power, or strength of the primeval sun". What does that concept have to do with a GODDESS, or with the PLANET VENUS? Well, the answer is - everything! And this is a particularly telling example because even the best experts have failed to explain why the visible "Glory" of a masculine power should so consistently appear in feminine form. Why was the feminine Glory of the ancient sun distinct from the sun god himself? More specifically, why the association with the planet Venus? And more specifically still, why did it depart from the god to become a monstrous, raging power in the heavens? Though we can only give the briefest summary here, there is no escaping the concrete meanings of the words. Sumerian texts celebrate the "terrifying glory" of Inanna (Venus), invoking the goddess as "the Light of the World", "the Amazement of the Lands", "the Radiant Star", "Great Light", and "Queen of Heaven". The texts depict the goddess "clothed in radiance". And it was said that the world stood in "fear and trembling at [her] tempestuous radiance". That is what I mean by concrete imagery attached to the "Glory" in early texts. The language is significant in more ways than one. The Sumerian word for the Glory or radiance in which Inanna clothed herself is melammu. The Akkadian term is sallammu and astronomical texts employ this very word for a COMET. Thus, the placement of the star of "Glory" is crucial under any reasonable test of our model. Both the texts and artistic renderings locate the star in the CENTER of "Heaven" - an absurdity in relation to the appearance of Venus in today's sky But the word translated as "Heaven" is the Sumerian An (Akkadian Anu), referring to the highest god in the pantheon. More specifically, An is the prototype of kings and founder of the Golden Age, the god we have identified (and more than one specialist has also identified) as the planet Saturn. In invoking the "terrifying glory in the center of An", the texts give us the very placement predicted by the model. Of equal significance are the artistic depictions of the star of Ishtar, the Babylonian Venus, showing the sphere of Venus placed squarely in the center of a much larger circle or sphere and radiating streams of light to the circumference of the larger body. That is the true meaning of the star of Glory in the ancient world, a meaning that can be confirmed by any researcher willing to investigate the subject with any seriousness. (The fact that the artists depicted Venus and other planets as SPHERES is no small matter either, since it is flatly impossible to detect the sphericity of a planet in today's sky.) A counterpart to the Mesopotamian image will be the Hebrew Shekinah, called the "indwelling," the feminine "Glory" of God. The Persian Zend Avesta speaks of the "awful Kingly Glory" (_Kavaem Hvareno_) which "clave unto the bright Yima" during the Golden Age. As we have noted elsewhere, Yima is to be identified with the planet Saturn. According to Avestan tradition, the Glory departed from Yima with the end of the Golden Age, That was when "the glory was seen to flee away from him". And strangely, on its departure, the Glory took the form of a female chaos monster, remembered as "that most powerful, fiendish Drug, that demon baleful". This turns out to be a key, for we are reminded that the goddess Inanna, the Sumerian star of terrifying glory, was also transformed into a world threatening dragon. "Like a dragon you have deposited venom on the land... Raining the fanned fire down upon the nation...With a roaring storm you roar; with Thunder you continually thunder". The Hindus remembered the Face of Glory, called _Kirttimukha_, said to have been born from the EYE OF SHIVA. It was lion-headed and its "mane, disheveled, spread far and wide into space". Authorities have recognized the Face of Glory as the "terrible aspect" of the Supreme Goddess Devi. This, in turn, draws our attention to the Egyptian goddess Tefnut, the central Eye and "Majesty" of Ra. When the Eye- goddess departed from Ra, she took on a raging countenance, appearing as a giant LION HEAD, with FLAMING, SMOKING MANE. Virtually identical images are attached to the Egyptian Sekhmet, also called the Eye and Majesty of Ra. In her departure, Sekhmet is simultaneously depicted in leonine form and as a fiery tempest - "a circling star, which scatters its flame in fire". Though we are merely skimming the service here, perhaps the reader has already surmised the connection with the Greek goddess Athena, whose acknowledged alter ego is none other than the famous Gorgon Medusa. Indeed, the terrifying head of Medusa, with disheveled, undulating, serpentine hair is the commonly-cited counterpart to the Hindu Kirttimukha or Face of Glory. Where, then (harking back to our previous discussion of Athena), should we expect to find the head of Medusa, but exactly where Greek artists so frequently depicted it - squarely in the center of the aegis or warrior shield? We are, in other words, dealing with a coherence of symbolism entirely missed by the specialists. On the one hand, we have the Greek image of the shield noted previously, with its central sphere and radiating lines of force, and on the other hand we have the shield revealing in its very center the head of Medusa - terrible aspect of Athena - performing precisely the role we should expect of the angry goddess. (Readers are referred to our earlier discussion of Venus as shield-goddess and protectress.) Both the Hindu Kirttimukha and the Medusa-head possessed the power to ward off evil, reminding us of the more ancient role of the goddess' terrifying countenance in fending off the celestial powers of darkness. Of the raging goddess Sekhmet, Egyptian texts say, "No one at all can approach her, the streams behind her are flames of fire". So too, the Sumerian Inanna, clothed in radiance: her enemies "dare not proceed before [her] terrible countenance". These prototypes will surely explain why, in more earthbound rituals, both the Kirttimukha and the Medusa head took the form of a gruesome "mask" placed as protection over the threshold. Symbolically, the frightful countenance of the angry goddess' "Glory" also means DEFENSE (= shield of the hero in his conjunction with the goddess.) The same concept will be seen in the Gorgon-like T'ao T'ieh of the Chinese, which the leading authority Ananda Commaraswamy identifies with both the Kirttimukha and the Gorgonian or Medusa head. Indeed, even in the Americas one encounters the same underlying concept in rites of such Aztec goddesses as Cihuacoatl and Toci. Of the goddess Cihuacoatl, the Aztecs sang - "She is our mother, a goddess of war, our mother a goddess of war, an example and a companion from the home of our ancestors...She appears when war is waged, she protects us in war that we shall not be destroyed...She comes adorned in the ancient manner with the eagle crest." (Compare the familiar, comet-like "crest" of Athena.) In Aztec ritual, the flayed "skin" of the mother goddess (provided by specially-selected sacrificial victims) was donned by warriors, not unlike the head of Medusa on the shield or over the threshold, the wildly disheveled hair deliberately presented as an emblem of terror - a weapon- mask-shield against all enemies. That Cihuacoatl herself was the "example" - meaning the PROTOTYPE - is all we need to know to see the link between later commemorative or ritual practices and the ancient role of the goddess. By comparing such motifs as these one will discover coherent, cross-cultural memories never imagined by conventional theorists. Only in OUR world do a "shield" and a frightening "mask" play different practical and magical roles. In the archetypal realms of world mythology, the two concepts are indistinguishable - both referring to the radiating "Glory" of the mother goddess Venus when, in the phase of cosmic upheaval and the wars of the gods, the goddess took on her terrifying, world-threatening, cometary aspect. Dave Talbott ---------------------------------------------- CATASTROPHIC'S TESTIMONIALS Various Kronians PAM HANNA: I've been on this forum for two years now. My friend in the office where I work (and who was privy to Kronia posts i thot would interest her) asked me once why i was so intensely interested in Catastrophics. Brought me up short. Why indeed? I didn't have a glib answer. Because...because....our past as a species is exciting. Because i am positive that if i had been born an orphan, adopted, and knew nothing of my parents...that i would not rest until i had dug out, dug up, ferreted forth, smelled out, burrowed in & traced - some mention of them. I would have had to do that. And it would be exciting and rewarding and it would take me to places i would never have gone otherwise. That's why. Catastrophics has taken me to places i would not have gone otherwise and it's all good. Painful sometimes, but good. What it all boils down to is that i'm looking for my mother and my father. Isn't everybody? KAREN TACKETT: Because... because... I just want to, OK? Why do other people dress up like civil war soldiers and aim blackpowder rifles at each other? Pardon me if this offends other people, but I've been bored for years by a family into.... sports. I was lucky that my civil war re-enactor uncle also happened to be into Velikovsky for awhile... didn't know all these years later I'd be spending my spare reading time digging into post- Veli thought (be trying to figure out with my cookie jar money how to pay for a book about dead mammoths.) Of course I was totally thrilled a few years ago when my dad bought me fossils for my birthday! (He Understands:) HAROLD TRESMAN: Mel's previous comment: >(Parenthetical remark here: My radical/puritan tendencies push >me to keep the theoretical apples separate from the theoretical >cranberries altho I'm aware apple-cranberry cocktails can be >tasty....) Harold: Been there, seen it, done it, suffered !! When it dawned on me that Velikovsky could actually be right, in principle even if not in detail, I certainly didn't expect my whole 'world' to be toppled and that I would spend the rest of my life reading, researching and [w]riting. You have no idea how many times I have regretted reading those damn books. I have often said, privately and publicly '...I have a tiger by the tail and I just cannot let go....'. . . . I had, I assume, read all the right books, on Astronomy and been bewitched & convinced, on Geology and been overwhelmed, on archeology, on paleontology, on you name it !! They don't come any more brainwashed than this [then] young 30 year old. But on the second reading of w-in-c I was converted to the principles implied and inherent to catastrophism. It wasn't easy because I realised it was all or nothing. It just couldn't be an apple/cranberry mix...it had to be pure, neat, unadulterated bloody cranberry. And so it has turned out to be that, whichever field of science I read, the 'alternative' ideas were there waiting to be integrated into a catastrophic/electrical explanation of an observational/realistic paradigm that actually fitted the reality of today and of the past. What I think I am trying to say is that you just cannot mix the apples and cranberries. If you keep trying the mix you will deprive yourself by always doubting both. ---------------------------------------------- ERUPTION or CAPTURE? Kronia Discussion HAROLD TRESMAN STARTS THE ERUPTION SIDE: ... it is my belief that Jupiter was originally erupted from proto-Saturn, had a little 'wander' around ... then returned, and started the whole sequence of disruption. DWARDU CARDONA REPLIES: That is, more or less, the position taken by Alfred de Grazia and Earl Milton. What is hard for me to accept here is the physical eruption of the planet Jupiter from the planet Saturn. WAL THORNHILL ADDS: That has always been an interesting possibility because it adds weight to proto-Saturn having been a brown dwarf star. The more mass the better for that argument. It also overcomes the objection that Saturn was unlikely to have entered the solar system in practically the same plane as the orbits of the other giant planets (although there may be unexplored electrodynamical reasons for that). Earl Milton, in Solaria Binaria, thought that Saturn was left over after the split up of a much larger body. He called that body Super Uranus. Super Uranus was, in that scenario, a binary partner of the Sun formed from an earlier fissioning of the Sun. ... The electrical eruption of Jupiter would likely have been a fairly sedate affair compared with novas seen and associated with bright stars. Which is just as well or we wouldn't be here now. However, I think our only chance of surviving such an outburst, if we were satellites of proto-Saturn at the time, would have been if we were in the polar configuration. Matter would be ejected from proto-Saturn preferentially (in Crew's model) from low latitudes. That, of course, would give rise to a similar effect to Dave's scenario, with Jupiter appearing to come from behind Saturn for the first time. You also have the niggling question about whether you should then call Jupiter, instead of Saturn, the primeval sun. AMY ACHESON CHIMES IN: Wal's previous comment: >It also overcomes the objection that Saturn was unlikely to have >entered the solar system in practically the same plane as the >orbits of the other giant planets Amy: It does seem quite a coincidence now, doesn't it? To preserve the Saturn/Mars/earth 23 degree polar angles, you have to have the Saturnian system's orbital plane tilted 23 degrees with respect to the plane of the sun's planets, yet it looks like the direction of motion of the encounter was in almost exactly the same plane as the sun's original planets. Add to that the fact that none of these planets today actually line up with the sun's equator and we have a whole hodgepodge of angles. Somehow I would have expected a capture scenario to produce something like the "Uranus" model -- with 15 nicely lined up "family" moons and two retrograde/way-off-equator interlopers. ERIC DOUMA ASKS: It is not clear to me what you mean with "the plane" of the orbiting bodies if not the ecliptic. Did you perhaps mean to say "the planes" (in the plural) to indicate their respective rotational planes, which indeed may not be the same as the ecliptic? AMY AND MEL ACHESON CLARIFY: WE ACTUALLY ARE SAYING that the plane in which Mars and the earth were orbiting Saturn before capture by the sun WAS NOT the ecliptic. That plane (around Saturn) was tilted at a 23 degree angle to the present ecliptic ... earth's and Mars' and Saturn's poles pointed the same direction; no inclination; no seasons. It was the total motion of this system (the tilted plane formed by the orbits of the planets around Saturn) which, although not yet orbiting the sun, was traveling in the plane with respect to the sun that we today call the ecliptic. That's why it seems such an unlikely coincidence, with 360 degrees to choose from, that the Saturn system should encounter the sun at such a good approximation to the same angle as the planets which were already a part of the solar system. Harold's hypothesis, that all the large planets were a part of proto Saturn, does explain this coincidence, plus the odd fact that the ecliptic and the seven planets which orbit close to it don't come especially near to orbiting the sun's equator. [Venus 3.4 degrees inclination to the ecliptic, earth 0, Mars 1.9, Jupiter 1.3, Saturn 2.4, Uranus .8, Neptune 1.8] Only Mercury, at 7.0 degrees, has the same orbital inclination as the sun's equator. So, to anticipate your next question -- how did the earth and Mars go from an equatorial orbit around Saturn to the present ecliptic orbits? The distances that the planets traveled above and below Saturn with respect to the ecliptic (actually the other way 'round -- the ecliptic is defined as the plane of the earth's orbit) are extremely small in comparison to the size of the solar system. So that when the sun captured the motion of earth, Mars, Venus, Saturn, they all continued to revolve in the plane defined by the angle at which the Saturnian system approached the sun (23 degrees from their orbits around Saturn.) This is why I think of the present angles to the ecliptic of these three planets (Saturn, Mars, earth) as "residual". Like their relative sizes, similar polar orientation, and similar earth/Mars rotation rates, these angles of inclination to the ecliptic fit into the physical evidence of the polar configuration. If they were stretched out along a polar shishkabob when the sun became dominant, I would expect Saturn to have a larger angle of inclination than Mars. It does. [We won't mention Venus here: it has a wilder history.] WAL THROWS IN A WORD FOR CAPTURE: I like to keep things as simple as possible and conforming to all of the available evidence. That leaves me favoring the entry of proto-Saturn (peace Harold) and its system of planets into the Sun's sphere of influence, rather than fissioning of a binary system. If the stars in this lane of the galaxy are all moving with roughly similar velocity vectors, then the merging of the two systems could take centuries, starting from the time of first contact of their plasmaspheres. From that moment on, things in the Saturnian system would begin to change. As we know from the Pioneer spacecraft, the Sun's plasmasphere stretches a very long way beyond the solar system. This scenario gives plausible reasons for the subsequent events and, I hope, fits with most of the fascinating things you have discovered, Dwardu. The idea of surviving a close-up-and- personal view of the birth of Jupiter from proto-Saturn seems to be stretching credibility beyond its elastic limit. It may be that by careful examination of axial tilts and spin rates, we can come up with some more ideas about the sequence of events. Remember too, that the asteroid belt gives evidence of at least four separate catastrophic events in that vicinity. ---------------------------------------------- INTERPLANETARY ELECTRIC FUSION By Wal Thornhill To give you some idea of my surprise that anyone would question the ability of an interplanetary electric discharge to cause nuclear fusion, I submit the following few paras from a much longer and very interesting article in the December issue of Analog. I was alerted to it by one of our Thoth readers, Wm. Hathaway (thank you!). The article by Tom Ligon is titled provocatively: "The World's Simplest Fusion Reactor: and how to make it work." Quote begins: Fusion the Easy Way-Using Vacuum Tube Technology There are a variety of other potential fusion fuels for which the necessary temperatures for fusion are simply too high to be achieved by the thermonuclear technologies DOE is currently pursuing. How do we know about these reactions? We have been doing them since 1928, using extremely simple devices called linear accelerators. Charged particles can be made to accelerate to enormous velocities and energies by means of simple electric fields By charging a grid to a few hundred thousand volts, you can accelerate protons or other light nuclei fast enough to fuse with almost any element in the periodic table. True, it takes far more energy to run such a device than it produces, but the equipment is extremely simple, and the "temperatures" achieved are easily sufficient to produce most transmutation reactions between nuclei. Let's bury this "temperature" nonsense right here and now. While you may have heard a figure of something like fifty or a hundred million degrees being required to produce fusion, in fact few researchers use those numbers except to impress the public. The units of temperature they use are "electron volts," which are easily understood in terms of linear accelerator operation. For every electron's worth of charge on a particle, multiply by the volts on the accelerating grid to get electron volts of energy. For purposes of impressing your friends, for each electron volt, multiply by 11,604 to get degrees Kelvin. You may be amused to know the electrons hitting the screen of the typical television set are around 200 million degrees according to this scheme, and 50 million degrees is a paltry 4300 electron volts. End of quote. Wal adds: It is simply dumbfounding to realise the doggedness with which scientists have allowed the mirage of generating nuclear fusion power by heating matter, "just like the sun does", to distort their vision. They are incapable of even acknowledging that the sun itself does not meet their theoretical expectations. Therefore, the intricate gadgetry constructed for the task of finding this unholy grail has become an enormously expensive set of monuments to our collective stupidity. So, the article by Ligon is a perfect example of the upstart crying out that the emperor has no clothes. He goes to considerable lengths to describe how to construct a device in your garage, which can produce verifiable fusion reactions, from a couple of thousand dollars worth of recycled parts. I expect he is probably correct. Why, in heaven's name, use inefficient heating to accelerate ions to overcome the Coulomb barrier between positively charged nuclei? And is the Coulomb barrier as simple as it is portrayed? In the realm of cold fusion at the biological level, it seems that the Coulomb barrier is not a simple electrostatic repulsion between two point positive charges. Instead, it is a complex dance between both positive and negative charges which make up the resonant electric particles we call the protons and neutrons in each nucleus. With this model it is conceivable that a "quantum" jump can be made from one resonant "unfused" state of two nuclei to another resonant "fused" state. The sheer delicacy of such a transition makes our attempts to smash nuclei together (whether by heat or electric fields) seem like the ultimate in brute force and ignorance. Wal Thornhill ---------------------------------------------- PLEASE VISIT THE KRONIA COMMUNICATIONS WEBSITE: http://www.kronia.com Other suggested Web site URL's for more information about Catastrophics: [Ed note: the SIS Website address has changed to: http://www.knowledge.co.uk/sis/ ] 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/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://www.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. ---