Re: Die Schere #19

[richard_al <richard_al@csi.com>]

Certainly the comment is short, as the definition of a myth in
previous message. Nobody reaches the real. It's the sense of the 99%,
which is a very big maximum far to be reached. 5% is better. What is
pointed on the difference between Physics and Parable is when a theory
is established (by the establishment), and with the  instruments, the
materials of approach of the physicians, we can't change anything of it
until the next theory, which generally uses  the same or close type of
instruments and mode of reason as the former.  The Parable, Myth, Legend
... is the kingdom of imagination  (sure Physics asks big imagination).
Even if there are real common or unusual facts to start, after, all
directions are possible.  Hat's off to the evangelist who created the
myth of resurrection.  He probably was a good psy to know that
occidental and middle east people would not adhere in majority to the
reincarnation in little birds or fishes. But there are many occidental
buddhists too. The same for the man or woman who invented the Immaculate
conception which is imho a nice myth.  Now the awful present. The shroud
(still it !!!  boring), this interesting piece of flax is a case because
it is at halfway in time (10 centuries instead of 20) and at halfway of
reality and fiction, just like the radioTV medias. I'm conscious not to
solve the question of reality, but just want to point on the drift in
the virtual. In the past, the clergy  could say that the shroud was
really that of Jesus, and nobody could say the contrary. Now it's the
same for the scientists. And worse,  the medias, TV series without art
and poetry take advantages, live on this foggy mixture of virtual and
real.
 
>A BROWN >In other words the language you use is based
>on the battle of the titans and the gods to use a Juengerian metaphor.
>ROBERTO CALVO MACIAS   >You are mixing technology with physics.
  
 Einstein writing his second letter to USpres in 45 to stop the process
- the first in 40 is to initiate and accelerate the nuclear bomb -
considers himself as mainly responsible for the works. For many years
now, there is the concept of techno-science. EJ brings us an other point
of view. Thank's to him we have a new approach. Certainly this global
metaphor suits to me (and others I suppose) well, my position is based
on it and I include in titans both Physics, technique, management,
finance, economy, consummation. I'm not so much post modernist cause the
reputation of spanish inn, but Baud offers an other way too. In this
moment, it's EJ I support but face to titans, ready to ally with the
devil. Just a little problem, if the devil is here, means that gods yet
came back.

Greetings
richard