Newton - The Last Of The Magicians

[cladking]

Here is a simple test for you. Use the "ancient language" to make a boatload of gold. You will be rich beyond your wildest dreams. Then to prove you did it you could give those that opposed you just a taste of that wealth. Make sure it is enough so that they take you seriously, but not so much that they would be rich themselves. A couple of hundred thousand dollars should do the trick.

Think of the devil...

I just followed that link above where you tried to save me from my folly with the rainbows. You were quite right and I was wrong. I'm still reworking this and hope to have a corrected answer soon.



There are quite a few ways to make money here. I could easily write an interpretation of the Pyramid Texts but initial sales would be very weak.

But it's going to take decades of intensive effort by scientists to redevelop ancient science and practical applications might be limited. Personally I believe there will be many important applications early on including a means to run ancient science and modern science in tandem and possibly even the use ancient science as "programming" for machine intelligence. Much of the benefit will simply be in providing new perspectives to see old problems.

What would be the benefit of finding we're wrong about so many things?

Historically "right" has proven far better than wrong.

 

[cladking]

Use the "ancient language" to make a boatload of gold.

I had no idea there were this many;

List of funicular railways - Wikipedia

Ironically enough the pyramid builders called their linear funicular, "the two boats tied together".

In aggregate these funiculars make a great deal of money.

602c. in the bottom (hold) of the boat of gold, of Rē‘.

 

[Native]

I believe the myths are based on real science but they are still interpretations of Ancient Language, but not the Pyramid Texts.

If so, maybe the "Egyptian math" just describes their observations of different celestial objects and motions as well as their building methods, of course?
I´m sure you know of the Egyptian Ogdoad, the story of creation. To me this story deals with the pre-creation and factual creation of the Milky Way. What do you say to this?

If you have the time and interest, take a look at my paper here -
The Milky Way Mythology and the Stories of Creation and give a response.

 

[Native]

Ironically enough the pyramid builders called their linear funicular, "the two boats tied together".

And

602c. in the bottom (hold) of the boat of gold, of Rē‘.

The "boat of gold of Re" represents IMO the crescent Milky Way contours on both of the Earth´s hemisperes ("the twoo boats") of which the southern hemisphere Milky Way contours ALSO is symbolized as a Great Woman i.e. the Mother Goddess Nut or Hathor.

Quote from - Hathor - Wikipedia

"Hathor was herself a solar deity, a feminine counterpart to sun gods like Horus and Ra, and was a member of the divine entourage that accompanied Ra as he sailed through the sky in his barque".

Hathor is NOT a "Solar deity" but a Milky Way deity and the light in question here is the central light of the Milky Way. That is: Re/Ra/Atum-Ra = represents the central Milky Way light and NOT the Sun. This fits very well with the Ogdoad story of creation where Re/Ra/Atum-Re is the first "fiery entity" to be born out of the primordial elements.

This confusion takes place when scholars don´t have any ideas of what the Egyptian Ogdoad creation story is all about, so when they read of a mythical/cosmological light of creation, they have no other options but to interpret this as the Sun, but this is wrong.

Watch these links:
The origin of Mythical Ships
The great Mother Goddess

 

[cladking]

If so, maybe the "Egyptian math" just describes their observations of different celestial objects and motions as well as their building methods, of course?
I´m sure you know of the Egyptian Ogdoad, the story of creation. To me this story deals with the pre-creation and factual creation of the Milky Way. What do you say to this?

If you have the time and interest, take a look at my paper here -
The Milky Way Mythology and the Stories of Creation and give a response.

Little of my work is even relevant here. You may well be correct about it but I have no means to know. It was exceedingly difficult to have or communicate ancient science in modern language and Ancient Language collapsed about 2000 BC. No doubt the mathematics survived longer but math without language is a different tool. The "Ogdoad" is largely a later concept but, again, it probably is based on an interpretation of ancient science. This all needs to be rebuilt from the ground up because nothing survives except silly little rituals mistaken for an important book of religion and magic.

This won't help you any but for what it's worth the "Boat of the Sun" was the pyramid itself. It sailed north to the "imperishable stars". The pyramid was a mnemonic to remember the king by day and there was a star assigned to him for the night time. The circumpolar stars were "imperishable" because they never set so being assigned one of these stars was a sure thing for a king. But when the ancients spoke of imperishable stars they were actually referring the bubbles and mist from the column of water that sprayed out of the earth. This water was the motive force used in linear funiculars to construct and power the "Boat of Re".

The "boat of gold of Re" represents IMO the crescent Milky Way contours on both of the Earth´s hemisperes ("the twoo boats") of which the southern hemisphere Milky Way contours ALSO is symbolized as a Great Woman i.e. the Mother Goddess Nut or Hathor.

I'm not certain what the "boat of gold" is here. I believe it's likely to refer to a "contaminant" in one of the two boats tied together; the funicular counterweight.

This confusion takes place when scholars don´t have any ideas of what...

It's not only hathor which is confused but everything from the very dawn of man. We once knew our history in intimate detail and had an "advanced" science and math but then the formatting was lost (it is all probably recoverable by the way). Now we use a "confused" language that is adequate for "thought" but wholly inadequate for communication. Despite this inadequacy we have invented a new science thanks to Newton that has better languages (computer, scientific, and mathematic) and have thus gained great new knowledge. Confusion still underlies everything and this especially applies to the ancient myths and EVERYTHING that pre-dates the "tower of babel". Many individuals are very highly intuitive and can see shapes and movements behind this fog of confusion. Newton obviously (to me) was one such individual and you are most probably another. I suppose in very real ways we are both looking behind the veil and trying to use what we see to improve our worlds and restart physics. Newton did the exact same thing and failed but both of us might well be largely correct and/ or successful.

 

[ecco]

"Trained professionals" don't understand the writing at all as proven by the fact they themselves claim all this writing is incantation.

They do? Is that something for which you have evidence or is that just another IPIOOMA?

It's interesting you find my claim that there is no such thing as "intelligence" to be self serving. Did you think I was excluding myself?

If you don't believe you are intelligent, how could you have taught yourself to read hieroglyphics? You can read hieroglyphics, can't you?

"Science" was invented around such claptrap. Definitions and beliefs are part of the metaphysics of modern science.

That comment shows a lack of understanding about science.

Ancient metaphysics was language itself.

So you say.

 

[Native]

Little of my work is even relevant here. You may well be correct about it but I have no means to know. It was exceedingly difficult to have or communicate ancient science in modern language and Ancient Language collapsed about 2000 BC. No doubt the mathematics survived longer but math without language is a different tool. The "Ogdoad" is largely a later concept but, again, it probably is based on an interpretation of ancient science. This all needs to be rebuilt from the ground up because nothing survives except silly little rituals mistaken for an important book of religion and magic.

By reading the numerous mythical interpretations of academic scholars, it is obvious that they all lack the astronomical and cosmological knowledge.

As you state, this all needs to be rebuilt from the ground and this ground to me, lays in the numerous cultural Stories of Creation and it´s specific connection to the Milky Way creation also as told in the Egyptian Ogdoad. If having this perception, it is fairly easy to rebuilt the cosmological and scientific knowledge.

This won't help you any but for what it's worth the "Boat of the Sun" was the pyramid itself. It sailed north to the "imperishable stars". The pyramid was a mnemonic to remember the king by day and there was a star assigned to him for the night time. The circumpolar stars were "imperishable" because they never set so being assigned one of these stars was a sure thing for a king. But when the ancients spoke of imperishable stars they were actually referring the bubbles and mist from the column of water that sprayed out of the earth. This water was the motive force used in linear funiculars to construct and power the "Boat of Re".

Re-quote:
"This won't help you any but for what it's worth the "Boat of the Sun" was the pyramid itself. It sailed north to the "imperishable stars".

I´m well aware that our ancestors used geographic temples as a "mirror of heaven", so we possible both are right in this matter. It´s just me focusing on the celestial issues of stars and on the contours of the Milky Way.

Quote from - Hathor - Wikipedia
"Hathor was given the epithets "mistress of the sky" and "mistress of the stars", and was said to dwell in the sky with Ra and other sun gods. Egyptians thought of the sky as a body of water through which the sun god sailed, and connected it with the waters from which, according to their creation myths, the sun emerged at the beginning of time".

Here, the Sky is thougth as a "body of water" through which the "sun" god sailed. This only gives meaning to me when this "body of water" is interpreted as the white crescent contours of the Milky Way wich very much looks like a boat. This heavenly image of the Milky Way is culturally often named as the Heavenly River.

And if "the sun" emerged at the beginning of time from the primordial waters, this just can´t be the Sun in our Solar System as it wasn´t the first to be created in the Milky Way. Ergo: This light is NOT the sun but the central light in the Milky Way = Ra/Re/Atum-Ra is NOT the sun at all. It is of curse NOT the Solar System Sun which "emerged in the beginning of time". (Even in the biblical Story of Creation, the Solar System and the Earth was not the first to be created)

I wrote:
"This confusion takes place when scholars don´t have any ideas of what..."

It's not only hathor which is confused but everything from the very dawn of man. We once knew our history in intimate detail and had an "advanced" science and math but then the formatting was lost (it is all probably recoverable by the way). Now we use a "confused" language that is adequate for "thought" but wholly inadequate for communication. Despite this inadequacy we have invented a new science thanks to Newton that has better languages (computer, scientific, and mathematic) and have thus gained great new knowledge.

I´m VERY doubtfull of whether the modern humans have gained great new knowledge compared to the intuitive knowledge of our ancestors. Everwhere in all kinds of encyclopedias and books you can read of the light of the Milky Way wich is interpreted as the Sun.

Yes, we´ve gained lots of informations from different scientific branches, for instants with lots of cosmic images from different types of telescopes, but modern scientists don´t understand what they are observing at all because of bad theories and a general bad world perception.

I suppose in very real ways we are both looking behind the veil and trying to use what we see to improve our worlds and restart physics. Newton did the exact same thing and failed but both of us might well be largely correct and/ or successful.

Yes we are indeed. And it is also my opinion that Newton should have hold onto his Natural Philosophy instead of speculating on the math of the celestial motions.

Our ancestors kwew very well everything withtout being bothered by math and calculus.

 

[cladking]

If you don't believe you are intelligent, how could you have taught yourself to read hieroglyphics? You can read hieroglyphics, can't you?

Everyone in the world who can't read hieroglyphs is an idiot and everyone who can is a genius?

You might be an Egyptologist and not know it.

There is no "intelligence" as we define it. There is only language, memory, and "cleverness". We mistake consciousness for intelligence but all life is conscious and it is consciousness which confers the ability to survive and reproduce and not fitness, intelligence, adaptability, speed or other characteristics.

That comment shows a lack of understanding about science.

Really???!!!

Then imagine this page being blank except for the links and every link being blank;

Philosophy of science - Wikipedia

There's is no science outside of metaphysics and there is no science outside experiment.

You don't understand science.

 

[cladking]

Our ancestors kwew very well everything withtout being bothered by math and calculus.

I really don't know how far developed their science was. All I have is insight into the science that was necessary to communicate rituals at the kings' ascension ceremonies. This science is pretty remarkable especially as it applies to zoology and anatomy. They also understood mechanics. I don't know how much they knew but they also had a good understanding of astronomy which required higher level math. No, not calculus because they didn't use math we can even recognize yet. It was something different and probably representative and cardinal. Their knowledge was extensive but they did not derive it from observation and experiment. It came from observation and logic. As such this different tool worked in different ways and made discovery differently.

I actually suspect their knowledge of cosmology was quite advanced but it still depended on things that were observable. It still depended on their premises which were "chronocentric". The source I'm using came from 2700 BC and it was another 7 centuries before Ancient Language failed as the official language. It was likely another 7 or 8 centuries before it failed utterly (think "Nephilim"). I just don't know how far advanced they were and how much of this science really does show up in the myths, legends, and various religious writings (etc). I have little doubt there really is a lot of ancient science that isn't clearly visible to most of us. None of it is to me because my mind just doesn't work this way usually. Obviously Newton saw something but the only thing I saw was it's impossible for stinky footed bumpkins to drag 6 1/2 million tons up ramps. To each his own.

Otherwise I agree with you.

 

[Native]

@cladking,

Native said: ↑
Our ancestors kwew very well everything withtout being bothered by math and calculus.

Their knowledge was extensive but they did not derive it from observation and experiment. It came from observation and logic. As such this different tool worked in different ways and made discovery differently.

To me, "logic", as in Natural Logics, derives from observing nature itself and the from observing the celestial objects and motions around the Earth. And this includes of course observations via their intuitive spiritual senses as well.

I actually suspect their knowledge of cosmology was quite advanced but it still depended on things that were observable.

I agree. So WHAT could they observe? We all live on the same Earth, in the same Solar System, in the same Milky Way galaxy and in the same local part of the observable Universe.

These facts are logically embedded in all cultural Stories of Creation and in the case of the Egyptians, these facts are told in their Ogdoad story of creation which even have a description of the elementary conditions BEFORE this creation took off. (The four primordial pairs of deities)

It is HERE the deities of Atum-Ra and Hathor comes into the picture as the result of the elements coming together. Atum-Ra as the first fiery entity (the central Milky Way light) and Hathor as the Mother Goddess who gives forms to everything in the Milky Way.

This mythical description in the OGDOAD is in fact very similar to the Standard Model explanation of the Solar System formation which, strangely enough, doesn´t have the Milky Way connection, even as the Solar System is an integrated part of the Milky Way rotation. Here the ancient story of creation is far ahead of the modern cosmology.

Having said this, I´m convinced that the ancient cultural Stories of Creation DON`T deal with any creation of the entire Universe, but "just" with the pre-creation and factual creation of the Milky Way and it´s contents. The ancient cultures had the conviction that everything is an eternal cyclical change between formation/creation, dissolution and reformation, which of course excludes the strange speculative idea of a "Big Bang".

 

[ecco]

But you have not explained why you can read and understand hieroglyphics more accurately then trained professionals.

"Trained professionals" don't understand the writing at all as proven by the fact they themselves claim all this writing is incantation.

If you don't believe you are intelligent, how could you have taught yourself to read hieroglyphics? You can read hieroglyphics, can't you?

Everyone in the world who can't read hieroglyphs is an idiot and everyone who can is a genius?

I don't understand your comment. You indicated that you taught yourself to read hieroglyphics. Are you now saying you can't read hieroglyphics better than trained Egyptologists? Are you now saying you can't read hieroglyphics at all?

 

[ecco]

The source I'm using came from 2700 BC and it was another 7 centuries before Ancient Language failed as the official language. It was likely another 7 or 8 centuries before it failed utterly (think "Nephilim").

You don't understand science.

You say I don't understand science yet you use terms like "Nephilim" and "Ancient Language".

If you believe in the concept of an "Ancient Language" then it is you who does not understand science.

If you believe that there is anything scientific about the concept of gods and children of gods then it is you who does not understand science.

 

[cladking]

Are you now saying you can't read hieroglyphics at all?

I'm sorry but I thought I had made this clear; NOBODY can read hieroglyphs. Ancient Language can not be translated into modern languages because the formatting is wholly incompatible. "Language" isn't merely what animals use to communicate it is what we use to conceptualize reality. "All" sparrows have the exact same model of reality because they see all of reality in terms of what it means to be a sparrow. They have modeled reality in terms of what is important and apparent to each sparrow. Each species was its own reality and all of these realities rhymed and fit together. But humans were a little bit different because ancient humans had complex language which allowed the generational accumulation of knowledge. In other words each sparrow had to begin his scientific career at square one so never made it far. Humans not only had the accumulated wisdom of 40,000 years of science but they had the technology it cast off (such as agriculture and cities) so individuals could spend more time in the pursuit of knowledge. They ALL stood on the shoulders of giants. They all had the same model of reality because reality itself was cast in human terms.

Modern humans can't (at least don't) think this way because we now speak thousands of confused languages which we believe are understood but the reality is no two people take the same meaning from a sentence. We all must parse words on a real time basis to seek meaning. We all grew a second speech center in order to acquire modern language as babies. We had to learn to model language itself.

Ancient Language can NOT be parsed. Every word had a fixed meaning and intent was in context. Understanding Ancient language has nothing to do with "translation" or "reading". One must come to understand the single meaning of each word and then see how these meanings fit into the stated context. This has never been done before because everyone believed these were incantations and nonsense before they were even "translated" the first time. The words bear a striking resemblance to the "book of the dead' so they were interpreted in terms of the book of the dead. But they were written a thousand years earlier and they look like the "book of the dead" only because the authors of the "book of the dead" took the same erroneous meanings from the words. Please read that last sentence until it makes sense to you.

I shouldn't have said you don't understand science because you couldn't possibly take my intended meaning. I'm sure you could talk all day about E = MxC ^ 2 and understand it. What I meant was that people construct models of what they think science is and of experimental results. I'm merely saying that without understand epistemology and metaphysical implications within these models you are more like the average motorist who couldn't build an automobile with all the raw materials. But far worse we don't understand the nature of being a sparrow or being a human.

This isn't to suggest I do but it's quite apparent ancients better understood sparrows than we grasp our own humanity. This is because of language. A sparrow and a human once formatted reality in the same way but we don't. It is hard to see many things from our perspective. We are blinded by our own intelligence that is actually just consciousness driven by modern language.

It's difficult for you to believe but there probably really existed "Nephilim" who simply spoke Ancient Language centuries after humans discarded it. The stories of "Adam and Eve" and the "tower of babel" likely do have a referent in reality. Ancient stories and myth arose from human nature and human science. We are still the same humans and in stage 4 sleep our brains probably do still approximate the way ancient thought once worked. Our reality was founded on the ruins of ancient science and Ancient Language and to a large extent this is likely why we still have our hunches and intuitions lead us in the directions they do. We each see things that aren't readily apparent. We each see anomalies in our models and we use these observations to develop hypotheses or serendipitously to invent, discover, or rediscover. It is the same thing we use to devise experiment or utilize existing technology in new or unique ways. Indeed, we still use the same old noggin to think with mostly the same old wiring so it's hardly surprising we can mirror (reflect) ancient thought or be led in our one dimensional thinking by said wiring.

I believe our new speech center is sufficient to make us a new species.

 

[cladking]

If you believe that there is anything scientific about the concept of gods and children of gods then it is you who does not understand science.

"Gods" are a misapprehension. This word actually meant theory so they might have said something like "Velocity is the Child of the Gods Time and Distance" if they thought and modeled as we do.

THEY DID NOT!

 

[ecco]

I'm sorry but I thought I had made this clear; NOBODY can read hieroglyphs. Ancient Language can not be translated into modern languages because the formatting is wholly incompatible.

If you cannot read hieroglyphics, why did you say...

I studied the writing sufficiently to understand author intent. As I stated, I began with the assumption that all people always make sense in terms of their premises. Our job is to deduce their premises. This is what I have done with Pyramid Texts, its translations, and some of the glyphs. I linked it twice already.

You clearly refer to pyramid texts and to glyphs. If not hieroglyphics, then what writing did you study sufficiently?

 

[ecco]

Ancient Language can NOT be parsed. Every word had a fixed meaning and intent was in context. Understanding Ancient language has nothing to do with "translation" or "reading". One must come to understand the single meaning of each word and then see how these meanings fit into the stated context.

Context is also vital in understanding modern English.

Consider the word "read"...
I read it last night.
I will read it tomorrow.

Your brain, using context, "pronounces" the word as "red" in the first sentence and as "reed" in the second. Your brain understands the difference between the two.

I'm sure that modern Egyptologists can do that for hieroglyphics despite your protestations.

 

[ecco]

I'm merely saying that without understand epistemology and metaphysical implications within these models you are more like the average motorist who couldn't build an automobile with all the raw materials.

Yet without resorting to epistemology and metaphysical implications, relatively uneducated people around the world have been building cars for over 100 years.

The average motorist has no problem driving cars without ever thinking about epistemology and metaphysical implications.

Even the designers and engineers who create the cars do so without needing to resort to epistemology and metaphysical implications. I'm pretty sure Malcolm Sayer was thinking more about aesthetics than epistemology and metaphysical implications when he created this...

 

[ecco]

It's difficult for you to believe but there probably really existed "Nephilim" who simply spoke Ancient Language centuries after humans discarded it. The stories of "Adam and Eve" and the "tower of babel" likely do have a referent in reality.

It's difficult for me to understand why people would believe any one of the thousands of creation stories that man has concocted.

It's ridiculous to believe that "the sons of gods" had intercourse with human females and created giant offspring. Did you notice how misogynistic this writing is? Why couldn't the daughters of gods have intercourse with human males and create giant offspring?

The origins of the story of "Adam and Eve" are essentially no different than the origins of any other creation story. Ten thousand years ago some youngsters asked the tribal elder:

Oh Great Wise One, where did the first people come from?
Well, son, it's like this (insert creation story of choice here).​

Oh Great Wise One, why do the people on the other side of the mountain talk so funny?
Well, son, many years ago all the people got together to build a big ladder up into the sky so they could see god. God didn't want this, so he made it impossible for the different tribes to understand each other and so they couldn't build a ladder.​

You might think about this...why would Eve have been made from one of Adam's ribs? Women and men have the same number of ribs. More likely:

Oh, Great Wise One, why do so many mammals have penile bones, but humans do not.
Well, son, it's like this, after the great god created man from clay, he realized that man needed a helper. So he removed Adam's penile bone and from that he made Eve.
​

This kills three birds with one stone: Why men don't have penile bones; Where women came from; Why women are subservient to men.

 

[ecco]

"Gods" are a misapprehension. This word actually meant theory so they might have said something like "Velocity is the Child of the Gods Time and Distance" if they thought and modeled as we do.

THEY DID NOT!

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/hebrew-bible/who-are-the-nephilim/
The Nephilim, the product of the sons of god mingling with the daughters of Adam, the great Biblical giants, “the fallen ones,” the Rephaim, “the dead ones”—these descriptions are all applied to one group of characters found within the Hebrew Bible.

 

[cladking]

Even the designers and engineers who create the cars do so without needing to resort to epistemology and metaphysical implications. I'm pretty sure Malcolm Sayer was thinking more about aesthetics than epistemology and metaphysical implications when he created this...

You do realize I'm trying to communicate to you how Newton invented science and why he studied alchemy/ pyramids? You do realize I'm trying to tell you why some people (even in this very thread) are saying we misunderstand ancient people? You do realize I'm proposing a way off the exact same detour the human race has been on that Newton tried to stop? You do realize I'm proposing a different kind of science but there's no chance you'll understand it if you don't even understand the one that gave us the Volkswagen?

I said you can't parse Ancient Language. Of course we MUST parse modern language or it has no meaning at all. But you don't realize we each take a different meaning. You say; "you read it last night" and I see "I glanced at your post before responding to something altogether different".

Ancient Language can NOT be translated. It can NOT be parsed. It can NOT be "read" in the sense we mean this word. The meaning is the literal meaning. When they said the "the king is the pyramid" they literally meant "the king is the pyramid" but no matter how consistently they said this we read "the pyramid is the king's tomb". It's what we do. We see what we believe not what's in front of our eyes.

I told you before I solved the meaning of each word in the PT through how they are used in context. I told you that they had no words for "belief", "thought", or taxonomic words. They had no infrastructure for superstition so they could not have been superstitious. But you persist in ignoring these things. It's very easy to say I must be wrong and to cite chapter and verse you interpret to prove me wrong but your "theory" answers no questions and makes no prediction. Your "theory" doesn't explain observable fact like why do we see only beliefs and how did stinky footed bumpkins come to describe "evolution" and invent agriculture. You "theory" doesn't explain why history didn't start until 1200 years after writing or why Newton thought the gravitational constant could be found in the pyramid. Your "theory" doesn't explain why physics is bogged down in the 1920's or how Egyptology has gotten away with bad methodolgy of biblical proportions for over 150 years. Your "theory" merely denies the first humans (Adam and Eve) could be remembered rather than presenting evidence or logic that precludes the possibility. Simply stated Adam was merely the "first" with complex speech and the first to be assigned a star at his death. "S3h" and "Sopdet" were (probably) the mnemonic to remember these individuals and the rest is mere confusion.

Meanwhile I can make predictions and answer many fundamental questions about the great pyramid builders, the pyramids, and the nature of ancient people.

Since modern people have such a poor understanding of metaphysics they simply don't realize that not only is prediction (prophesy) the hallmark of true science, but it is also the very reason sciences have been invented. Our ancestors would have stayed in the caves and eaten raw meat if their science and metaphysics failed to make prediction. They'd have had no choice, either.

So he removed Adam's penile bone and from that he made Eve.

Maybe, but it sounds dirty... ...and sacrilegious.