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 V, No 2 Jan 31, 2001 EDITOR: Amy Acheson PUBLISHER: Michael Armstrong LIST MANAGER: Brian Stewart CONTENTS KEYHOLE EPISTEMOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .by Mel Acheson PARADIGM PORTRAITS VII: DARK MATTER MAPPING . . . . . . .by Amy Acheson THE ELECTRIC SUN, Part 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . by Don Scott ERASER ON EROS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . from Discussion BLACK HOLE PROOF A SPOOF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . by Wal Thornhill >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-----<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< KEYHOLE EPISTEMOLOGY by Mel Acheson We peer at the universe through keyholes: We sense half a dozen colors, variations of rough and smooth, flavors that are sometimes familiar, a few octaves of pressure oscillations in air. What are we missing? The colors of microwaves and x-rays, the sounds of electric currents, the smells of magnetic fields, the sensations for which we have no names or even imagination. All we get from these keyholes are cascades of tiny sparks between nerve cells. We arrange these sparks into patterns, which we call perceptions and conceptions and facts. We give them names, and the names relate one with another, and these relationships imply points of view. The name we give to the viewpoint that's peering through the keyhole, to the metaphorical eye that sees what there is to see, is the I of ego who understands that it sees. When this eye looks back on itself, when the I understands that it understands, it becomes conscious. This consciousness has an inherent bias. Because we're not conscious of what's unconscious, we assume what's conscious is all there is. Consciousness is like a spotlight in a dark room: Because all we see is what's within the circle of illumination-- the wallpaper, the picture, a chair and its shadow--we think that's all there is to see. We can overcome this bias if we pay attention not to the objects illuminated but to our activity of seeing them. Memory helps: The circle of illumination moves; we see other objects; we remember what we no longer see. Libraries help: We can discover what others have seen. This prompts us to realize there's more to the universe than we've seen, experienced, understood. But it's not just the circle of illumination that can move. The source also can move. The spotlight can shine on the same objects from different locations. The nervous sparks from which we form the patterns that imply a viewpoint can be rearranged to form a different pattern, and the different pattern will imply a different viewpoint. We call this learning. It prompts us to realize there can be more than one way to see things, there can be more than one theory to explain things. >From a different viewpoint, familiar objects--"the facts"--look different: We see the wallpaper, the picture, and two chairs. Curiosity goads us to invent ways of generating additional sparks that might allow us to judge whether the pattern of one chair and its shadow or the pattern of two chairs is the "real" one. We call this experimentation, verification, and speculation. Again, if we pay attention not to the objects illuminated but to our activity of seeing them, we realize that "reality" is not what we start with but what we end up with. It's the picture that results from arranging patterns, generating patterns, modifying patterns, and associating patterns until we have a coherent composition. With a large movement of viewpoint, the patterns of nervous sparks we call "fundamentals" can change. This is a paradigm shift. What once was a dark room with light shining through pinholes in the wallpaper becomes a four-dimensional manifold of emptiness interrupted with transient specks of thermonuclear explosions. It produces a different picture of a different reality. Seeing the universe from more than one paradigm provides a kind of cognitive parallax that gives a sense of depth and historicity to consciousness. The awareness of different objects and different viewpoints and different realities can lead to an awareness of limits: Each perspective will have its domain of validity. These domains are the basis for what we call the provisionality of theories in science. The nature of cognitive knowledge--that common human trait which is simply applied methodically by science--is not suited to staking claims to The Truth. Provisionality is more limited...and more useful. It's flexible, adaptable; a tool, not a Procrustean bed. The "I" who thinks of itself as the center of a viewpoint can be liberated from its attachment to particular viewpoints. It can see itself as an explorer of viewpoints, a creator of viewpoints, an artisan of cognitive composition. This makes of science an art instead of a religion, an invention instead of a ritual. Science is not so much a search for THE TRUTH as it is the generation of truthfulness. This is the distinction between justificationism and critical rationality. Cognitive knowledge is not something that's justified by being founded on some incorrigible ground. Rather, it's a mutable metaphor in which every theory and every proposition is open to critical reexamination. This is what makes peeking through the keyhole so exciting. Everyone's carving a different sculpture or composing a different tune or painting a different picture of the universe. Some of those efforts turn out to be quite useful and pleasing. I've collected a few; I plan to collect more. If you've only got one hanging on your wall, I urge you to make room for a second. Mel Acheson thoth at whidbey.com *********************************************************** PARADIGM PORTRAITS VII: DARK MATTER MAPPING By Amy Acheson QUESTION FROM A READER: I'm just wondering how you might interpret the findings discussed in the following "dark matter" article: http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0012/03vlt/ Regards, Andy Doerkson THE ARTICLE BEGINS: An international team of astronomers has succeeded in mapping the "dark" (invisible) matter in the Universe, as seen in 50 different directions from the Earth. They find that, within the uncertainty, it is unlikely that mass alone would stop the current expansion of the Universe. AMY ACHESON RESPONDS: This calls to mind the many careful calculations made by hard- working astrologers to nail down the perfect epicycles of the planets. Their math was accurate, their tools were the best available for the time, their results were impeccable. But the assumption behind their theory -- that the earth was the center of the solar system -- was wrong. Today, another assumption goes without question in cosmology. That assumption is the "recession factor" -- Observation: for the nearest galaxies, the smaller diameter, fainter the galaxy, the higher the redshift. Conclusion: the farther the galaxy, the higher its redshift. Usual use of that conclusion: galactic distances can be determined by redshift -- the higher the redshift, the farther the galaxy. This assumption is the only basis of the further extrapolation that the universe is expanding and the only reason for believing that there ever was a big bang. Even Edwin Hubble, who did the first observational studies and for whom the conclusion -- the Hubble Expansion -- was named, was uncomfortable with this "recession factor". As he writes in his 1937 book, _The Observational Approach to Cosmology_, "The disturbing features are all introduced by the recession factor, by the assumption that red-shifts are velocity-shifts. The departure from a linear law of red-shifts, the departure from uniform distribution, the curvature necessary to restore homogeneity, the excess material demanded by the curvature: each of these is merely the recession factor in another form. ... On the other hand, if the recession factor is dropped, if redshifts are not primarily velocity-shifts, the picture is simple and plausible. There is no evidence of expansion and no restriction of the time-scale, no trace of spatial curvature and no limitations of spatial dimensions." Without the redshift/distance relationship, the mighty Coma Cluster would have been located where it fits perfectly, as a northern arm to the Virgo Supercluster. And if the Coma Cluster actually is where it appears to be (as opposed to where the redshift places it), then astronomers would never have reached the conclusion that this cluster needs 10-100 times more mass in order for gravity to prevent it from flying apart. Dark matter was invented to solve that problem for the Coma Cluster, and has been used as a fudge factor to reconcile discordant observations ever since. But the question raised by this article is galactic alignment. In a big bang universe, distances are determined by redshift and distribution is homogeneous, especially in the early (high redshift) stages that happened so soon after the big bang. Thus, any non-random distribution of galaxies must be explained. The dark matter fudge factor, this time combined with gravitational lensing, is needed again. In Halton Arp's intrinsic redshift universe, high redshift quasars and low redshift galaxies are clustered together in family groups. The high redshift objects are associated with and ejected from low redshift active galaxies. Alignment is expected, even predicted - - no fudge factor involved. In _Seeing Red_, Arp shows that most quasars are distributed in a 20 degree cone from the spin axis of active galaxies. Galaxy clusters and individual galaxies follow a similar pattern, with a 35 degree ejection cone. Also in _Seeing Red_, Arp devotes an entire chapter (7) to gravitational lensing. In every case he has been able to show that the phenomenon claimed as high redshift object "lensed" by foreground galaxy or cluster is more likely an object ejected by the foreground object (usually a quasar, but sometimes a shell or jet). This was an interesting article on dark matter, but beware of the conclusion that "It can only be explained by gravitational lensing effects produced by clumps of dark matter in space, distributed along huge 'filaments'." There are other -- maybe better -- explanations. ~Amy Acheson ********************************************************** THE ELECTRIC SUN & THE HERTZSPUNG-RUSSELL DIAGRAM by Don Scott INTRODUCTION: In 1911 Ejnar Hertzspung constructed a plot of the absolute brightness vs. spectral class (temperature) of the stars whose distances we could then accurately measure by the parallax method. In 1913 Henry Norris Russell independently repeated this exercise. This plot is therefore named the Hertzsprung-Russell (HR) diagram, and is one of the first topics presented in introductory astronomy courses. It is clear that the HR diagram is a plot of actual observations - not something deduced from theory. So, any viable model of the workings of a star must be consistent with it. Is the Electric Sun (ES) model of how a star is powered consistent with the HR diagram? THE HR DIAGRAM: In the HR diagram, as it is usually presented, the vertical axis is labeled with two scales: Absolute Magnitude (linear scale from about 18th magnitude at the bottom running up to perhaps -8 or so at the top), and Luminosity x Sun (log scale with 0.00001 at the bottom running up to 100,000 at the top). The horizontal axis also is labeled with several scales: Spectral Class - left to right: O and B[blue], A[white], F[yellow], G[yellow-orange], K[orange], M[red]). More often, recently, the "Johnson B-V index" replaces the Spectral Class scale. B = blue, and V = violet. A star is viewed through a blue (pass) filter and then through a violet (pass) filter. The star's "color index" is the difference in apparent magnitude between the two observations. For example, the B-V color index is mB-mV. B-V is zero for the star Vega (spectral class A0), and is about 0.61 for the Sun which is redder than Vega. Red giant Betelgeuse has a B-V index of 1.83 and spectral class M2. Originally, the B-V index was simply the difference between a star's visual and photographic magnitudes. Another horizontal axis scale - Absolute Temperature, also runs from left to right (from around 20,000 to 3000 K) corresponding to the (decreasing!) black-body temperature of those spectral classes. [As an engineer, I object to plotting increasing temperature from right to left! But such is the convention of astronomers. We will live with it.] A single given star defines a single point on this plot. A web search for the topic "Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram" will yield many different renderings of the HR plot. Our Sun, being a fairly typical star, falls almost at the center of the diagram (at Luminosity = 1 and Abs mag. = 5, Spectral Class G, and (photospheric) Temp. = 6,000K). The points on the plot seem to group nicely, generally forming a long, slightly diffuse line, that snakes from the upper left down toward the lower right. The line falls very steeply at the lower right end. There are two other less populated clouds of points: one group at the upper right and another one strung out across the bottom of the plot from a concentration in the lower left of the diagram. STELLAR EVOLUTION: Mainstream "stellar evolution" attempts to describe how stars age (run out of nuclear fuel) and slowly migrate, taking hundreds of thousands of years to do so, tracing paths from one location on the HR diagram to another (the star going from one spectral class to another). The paths that stars "must take" are, of course, completely predicated on the assumption that stars are fueled by the Hydrogen - Helium fusion process. The ES model does not make that assumption. Humans have not been around long enough to actually observe any stars making the predicted slow migrations from one place on the HR diagram to another. So, at present, slow "stellar evolution" is another one of those complicated theoretical constructs that live brightly in the minds of astronomers without any observational evidence of their actual existence. ADD A NEW HORIZONTAL AXIS: In the ES model the important variable is: current density (Amps/sq m) at the star's photospheric surface. If a star's current density increases, the arc discharges on its surface (photospheric granules) get hotter, change color (away from red, toward blue), and get brighter. The absolute luminosity of a star, therefore, depends on two main variables: current density at its effective surface, and its size (the star's diameter). Therefore, let us add a new scale to the horizontal axis of the HR diagram: "Current Density at the Surface of each Star". Consider moving from the lower right of the HR diagram toward the left. In so doing we are moving in the direction of increasing current density at the star's surface. RED AND BROWN DWARFS: The first region on the lower right of the diagram is where the current density has such a low value that double layers (DLs) (photospheric granules) are not needed by the plasma surrounding the (anode) star. This is the region of the brown and red "dwarfs" and giant gas planets. The plasma that constitutes the star is in its "normal glow" range - or perhaps, in the case of a large gas planet, the "dark current" range. As we progress leftward and steeply upward, we enter the range where some arc tufting becomes necessary to sustain the star's electrical discharge. The orbiting X-ray telescope, Chandra, recently discovered an X- ray flare being emitted by a brown dwarf (spectral class M9 = very cool) . This poses quite a problem for the advocates of the stellar fusion model. A star this cool should not be capable of X-ray flare production. However, in the ES model, a slight change in the level of total current impinging on a brown/red dwarf star might well produce a large change in the size and/or number of photospheric arcs (tufts) and their associated double layers. A strong electric field is associated with every DL, and a strong E- field is the easiest way to produce X-rays. As arcing covers more and more of the surface of a star, the star's luminosity increases sharply - plasma arcs are extremely bright compared to plasma in its normal glow range. This accounts for the steepness of the HR curve in this region - a slight increase in current density produces a large increase in luminosity. As we move upward and toward the left in the diagram, stars have more and more complete coats of photospheric arcs (tufting). A case in point - NASA recently discovered a star, half of whose surface was "covered by a sunspot". A more informative way to say this would have been that "Half of this star's surface is covered by photospheric arcing." The present controversy about what the difference is between a gas giant planet and a brown dwarf is a tempest in a teapot. They are members of a continuum - it is simply a matter of what the level of current density is at their surfaces. NASA's discovery supplies the missing link between the gas giant planets and the fully tufted stars. MAIN SEQUENCE STARS: Continuing toward the left, beyond the "knee of the curve", all these stars are completely covered with tufts (have complete photospheres), their luminosity no longer grows as rapidly as before. But, the farther to the left we go (the higher the current density), the brighter the tufts become, and so the stars' luminosities continue to increase. The situation is analogous to turning up the current in an electric arc welding machine. The increased brightness of the arcs accounts for the upward slope of the line toward the left. Mathematically we have the situation where the variable plotted on the horizontal axis (current density) is also one of the factors in the quantity plotted on the vertical axis (luminosity). The more significant this relationship is, the more closely the plot will approach a 45 degree straight line. [Reminder: Our progression from right to left is not necessarily a description of one star evolving in time - we are just moving across the diagram from one static point (star) to another.] That the stars do not all fall precisely on a line, but have some dispersion above and below the line, is due to their variation in size. The relatively straight portion of the HR diagram is called the "main sequence." This nomenclature gives a false impression, that stars move around "sequentially" in the HR plot. The HR diagram is a static scatter plot, not a sequence. WHITE AND BLUE STARS: When we get to the upper left of the main sequence, what kind of stars are these? This is the region of O type, blue-white, high temperature (35,000+K) stars. As we approach the far upper-left of the HR diagram (region of highest current density), the stars are under extreme electrical stress - too many Amps per sq. meter. Extreme electrical stress can lead to a star's splitting into parts, perhaps explosively. Such explosions are called novae. The splitting process is called fissioning. FISSIONING: To quote from page 6 of Wal Thornhill's web site on the Electrical Universe: "... internal electrostatic forces prevent stars from collapsing gravitationally and occasionally cause them to "give birth" by electrical fissioning to form companion stars and gas giant planets. Sudden brightening, or a nova outburst marks such an event. That elucidates why stars commonly have partners and why most of the giant planets so far detected closely orbit their parent star." If a sphere of fixed volume splits into two smaller (equal sized) spheres, the total surface area of the newly formed pair will be about 26% larger than the area of the original sphere. (If the split is into two unequally sized spheres, the increase in total area will be something less than 26%.) So, to reduce the current density it is experiencing, an electrically stressed, blue-white star may explosively fission into two stars! This provides an increase in total surface area so as to result in a reduced level of current density at each point on the (new) stars' surfaces. Each of two new (equal sized) stars will experience only 80% of the previous current density level and so both will jump to a new location farther to the right in the HR diagram. If the resulting binary pair are unequal in size, the larger one will have the larger current density - but still lower than the original value. The smaller member of the pair might have such a low value of current density as to drop it back, abruptly, to "brown dwarf" or even "giant planet" status. In any event, both stars will move to new locations in the HR diagram. FG SAGITTAE: The star FG Sagittae is a case in point. Wal points out that FG Sagittae has changed from blue to yellow since 1955! It, quite recently, has taken a deep dive in luminosity. FG Sagittae, is the central star of the planetary nebula (nova remnant?) He 1-5. It is a unique object in the sense that for this star we have direct evidence of stellar evolution but in a time scale comparable with the human lifetime. "Around 1900 FG Sge was an inconspicuous hot star (T = 50,000 K) of magnitude 13. During the next 60 years it cooled to about 8000 K and brightened in the visual region to magnitude 9, as its radiation shifted from the far-UV to the visual region. Around 1970 a whole new bunch of spectral lines appeared due to elements such as Sr, Y, Zr, Ba and rare earths. These elements, produced by neutron capture in the stellar interior had bubbled up to the surface! The star cooled further in the 1970s and 80s and then all of a sudden in 1992 its magnitude dropped to 14. Further drops occurred from 1992 to 1996 with a very deep minimum near magnitude 16 in June of 1996." [Italics added] So, after abruptly brightening by four magnitudes, it has dropped seven magnitudes. From the end of the last century FG Sagittae has evolved across the HR diagram changing from a normal hot giant to a "late spectral type" (cool) star with marked changes in its surface chemical composition. This is not the kind of slow stellar evolution mainstream astronomers envision. And FG Sagittae is a binary pair! The official wording was, "In 1995 FG Sge changed in brightness in a quite sporadic manner from V~10.5 to ~13.0 according to the data by Hungarian Astronomical Association-Variable Star Section. During the spectral observations on 9/10 and 10/11 August, FG Sge was very faint (HAA-VSS data: V~12.5-13.0, according to Variable Stars Observers' League of Japan: ~13.3) and therefore erroneously the visual companion 8'' apart from FG Sge was actually observed. This is probably the first high resolution spectrum of the companion ever obtained. The spectrum turned out to correspond to a quite normal giant with the spectral type around K0." Is FG Sagittae an example of the binary fissioning (caused by electrical stress) that was described above? It seems to have all the basic characteristics: nova-like brightening followed by loss of luminosity and loss of temperature - moving to a different spectral type with marked changes in its surface chemical composition, and discovery of a binary companion. So, in the Electric Star version of "stellar evolution" things happen fast. If the fusion model were correct, even if a star's "central core" could be instantaneously extinguished, it would take hundreds of thousands of years for the effect to be seen at the star's surface. It would not be observed within a "human lifetime". It didn't take FG Sagittae hundreds of thousands of years to "run down." Migrating across the HR diagram can happen (astronomically) very quickly - and apparently does! Binary stars are extremely common. Don Scott *********************************************************** ERASER ON EROS discussion AMY SAID: Check this out: http://near.jhuapl.edu/iod/20010112/index.html The caption suggests that the surface looks as if part of it were erased. That's exactly Wal Thornhill's concept of what electric machining does. It can peal the surface off in one place and it can deposit it elsewhere in layers (even on a different astronomical body). Meanwhile, NEAR-Shoemaker is in close orbit around Eros from now until it sets down February 12. The pictures it is sending back are fabulous. The one above is only 1.4k (.9 miles) across. Check out the "picture of the day" archive for more. Here's the homepage: http://near.jhuapl.edu/ AL de GRAZIA COMMENTED: Yes, it does look like electrical machining and also like tornado hoovering -- and possibly the two are the same. A de G WAL THORNHILL REPLIED: Exactly, Al. When I was doing experiments on electric discharges to a clay surface there was an electric wind effect that would blow away all of the dust and loose particles from the surface before any arcing took place. When the diffuse discharge is big enough it will rotate causing a tornado effect. We have seen but not recognized electric winds on Mars. Mars has no counterpart of thunderclouds to provide a convenient path to ground for electrical differences between the ionosphere and the planet. As a result more diffuse and very tall discharges must occur, giving rise to an electrical vortex that manifests by the material raised from the surface into the thin atmosphere. They are powerful "dust devils". In addition to dust it is likely that some electrical spark machining of surface rock takes place. There have been pictures of dust devils leaving tracks across Mars. In some areas where they are prevalent the surface is marked with dark streaks like a plate of wholemeal spaghetti. Some markings are straight, others curved and loopy. The Martian dust devils are tall by comparison with their Earthly counterparts, reaching a height of 8 kilometres (5mi), [comparable to the height of the tallest peaks in the Himalayas.] ~Wal Thornhill ************************************************************ BLACK HOLE PROOF A SPOOF by Wal Thornhill the following report enters the twilight zone of one of Einstein's monsters: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/01/0112blackhole.html The text follows: No one has ever seen a black hole, but they are predicted by Einstein's general theory of relativity, and few scientists doubt their existence. Finding an event horizon, a sphere around a black hole that represents the last gasp of 'normal' activity, would prove the whole concept. So [Joseph Dolan of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center] spent years in search of one, poring over old Hubble Space Telescope data of an object called Cygnus XR-1, a stellar black hole in our own galaxy, roughly 6,000 light-years away. What he found in images from 1992 were bright flashes of ultraviolet light that sputtered and then disappeared. Dolan suggests that the signals-he found two separate instances of them- represent hot blobs of gas orbiting inward and spiraling through the event horizon. Dolan presented his findings at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society meeting in San Diego, California. The Twilight Zone Cygnus XR-1, with a mass estimated at three to seven times that of our Sun compressed into an area no larger than Earth, is thought to be part of a binary system . The black hole sucks hot gas off of a large companion star, which is roughly 30 times as massive as our Sun. This gas streams toward the black hole, going into an ever-tighter orbit. Along with other material, the gas forms a flat disk called an accretion disk. Here's how the gas blobs would disappear, as predicted by the theory of black holes: As a blob of hot gas approaches the point of no return -the event horizon -immense gravity stretches the light waves emanating from the hot gas. At a certain point, the wavelengths are stretched so far that they are no longer visible. The gas then crosses over into a sort of 'twilight zone,' where time and space no longer obey rules we understand. Pulse Trains The sequence of pulses Dolan spotted six in one event and seven in the other - each lasted just 0.2 seconds, diminishing in strength with each pulse. And then they were gone. Such an event, if this was one, is called a dying pulse train. "If pulse trains have clearly been detected, then it is indeed a milestone," said Neil Brandt, assistant professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Penn State. "However, the difficult part is in proving that they have indeed been detected. It is generally difficult to use a complex system, such as an accretion disk around a black hole, as a springboard to address fundamental issues." The difficulty becomes more pronounced when working with limited data, Brandt told SPACE.com , adding that the finding could spur new research, using similar methods, into Cygnus XR-1 and other black holes in our galaxy. In an e-mail interview, Dolan emphasized the preliminary nature of the findings. "If we were trying to convict Cygnus XR-1 of being a black hole in court, we'd win a civil case that only needs a preponderance of the evidence, but not a criminal case, that requires beyond a reasonable doubt," Dolan said. "Finding an even horizon would put the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt." Dolan notes that observations of many binary star systems suspected of having a black hole have proved that the dense central object is not a white dwarf star or a neutron star . Though these are also very dense objects, they are not massive enough to account for the activity scientists see. "But we haven't ruled out the possibility of their being something more exotic than a black hole," Dolan said, admitting the possibility that black holes don't exist at all. But this would mean that Einstein was no Einstein, and a new theory of gravity would have to explain the complex activity around objects like Cygnus XR-1. WAL THORNHILL COMMENTS: I think the unpalatable truth is contained in the last sentence. It seems to me that Einstein made it fashionable for theoretical physicists to live in their heads and perform "thought experiments". It is one thing to frame hypotheses by day-dreaming but to think that experiments are carried out by sucking on a pipe in an armchair is pure "Disneyesque" fantasy. Einstein's theory of gravity is the craziest explanation of the phenomenon imaginable. I believe a recent cartoon in Scientific American has unwittingly shown us where black holes are to be found: They exist inside the heads of theoretical astrophysicists! And with their eyes wide shut and fingers in their ears, there they shall remain. A sequence of pulses in a "dying pulse train" is precisely the kind of effect expected from the pinch effect in a plasma when stored electric charge is suddenly discharged and at peak current is repeatedly 'pinched off'. The black hole theorists have never satisfactorily explained why an accretion disk should store matter up and release it in blobs - never mind in decreasing sized blobs! Wal Thornhill See the home of the Electric Universe at: http://www.holoscience.com ************************************************************ PLEASE VISIT THE KRONIA COMMUNICATIONS WEBSITE: http://www.kronia.com Subscriptions to AEON, a journal of myth and science, now with regular features on the Saturn theory and electric universe, may be ordered from this page: http://www.kronia.com/html/sales.html Other suggested Web site URL's for more information about Catastrophics: http://www.knowledge.co.uk/sis/ http://www.flash.net/~cjransom/ http://www.knowledge.co.uk/velikovskian/ http://www.bearfabrique.org http://www.grazian-archive.com/ http://www.holoscience.com http://www.users.uswest.net/~dascott/Cosmology.htm http://www.catastrophism.com/cdrom/index.htm http://www.science-frontiers.com ----------------------------------------------- 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. thoth at Whidbey.com 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. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981791792/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: kroniatalk-unsubscribe at egroups.com