Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Leucretius must have his day!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Leucretius must have his day!

    We must have a Lucretius Day in commemoration of his publication of De Rerum Natura. He started all the trouble of modern science, atoms. infinities, and other such nonsense that stirred up the believers in antiquated beliefs of his day.


    149

    There is one simple point we have to start from:

    The gods never made a single thing out of nothing.

    Because, if one things frightens people, it is

    that so much happens, on earth and out in space,

    the reasons for which seem somehow to escape them,

    and they fill in the gap by putting it down to the gods.

    That is why, once we know that nothing can come from nothing,

    we are on the right track already and likely to see

    how everything starts and goes on in an ordered sequence

    and nothing at all is merely the work of the gods.

    . . . . . .


    You know I have said creation out of nothing

    is nonsense and so is destruction of things to nothingness.

    But since you may doubt the validity of a doctrine

    requiring the existence of invisible elements [atoms]*,

    I should like to draw your attention to certain bodies

    which must be allowed to exist, although we can’t see them.


    *He acknowledge Epicurus as his source for knowing atoms exist.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-15-2014, 09:27 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  • #2
    Gravity

    For if anyone thinks that the heavier bodies could

    fall on the lighter, because they fall down more swiftly,

    and that this could be the origin of the encounters

    which bring about the movements of generations,

    they are certainly wandering a long way from the truth.

    Anything falling through water or through the air

    no doubt must gain in speed as it has more weight

    because the body of water and the nature of air

    are such that they cannot offer equal resistance

    to everything, but give way fast to the heaviest:

    But the void has no power of resisting anything

    at any time whatsoever or at any place;

    Its nature is to give way, and so it does.

    It follows that the void is passive and everything falls

    through it at equal speed whatever its weight


    and therefore there is no question of lighter elements

    being fallen upon from above, so having encounters

    which might produce the movements required by nature.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      quare etiam atque etiam paulum inclinare necessest corpora; nec plus quam minimum

      Therefore again and again it is necessary for the bodies to swerve, no more than a little ...

      2,243-245
      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

      Comment


      • #4
        because the body of water and the nature of air are such that they cannot offer equal resistance to everything, but give way fast to the heaviest:

        Very poor presentation, the nature of air and water is to have a uniform resistance according to their nature, that is overcome by surface area, not weight.

        Those who dream may hit on some aspect of the truth, it is not until that truth is integrated with other revealed truths that it becomes understood. It is far less useful to talk about a place of frictionless spheres than it is to measure the resistance of various substances against, say, a single rock, in a controlled manner. Build your theory on the rock, not the void, lest you lose your connection to truth through lack of experimental results. Otherwise even the truths you discover will be despised, as is anything mixed with lies and fanciful speculation.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by robrecht View Post
          quare etiam atque etiam paulum inclinare necessest corpora; nec plus quam minimum

          Therefore again and again it is necessary for the bodies to swerve, no more than a little ...

          2,243-245
          No. What's the point? Leucretius is going to far from accurate on many things. This is first century BCE
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            No. What's the point? Leucretius is going to far from accurate on many things. This is first century BCE
            No, I just think it is an interesting part of his theory. I've even seen some people compare it to QM.
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
              Those who dream may hit on some aspect of the truth[/B], . . .
              Those who don't, stay stuck in the past. Some of his conclusions were based on observation, and he encouraged this for the future.


              it is not until that truth is integrated with other revealed truths that it becomes understood.
              Unfortunately, as far as the science of our physical world, this remains a ball and chain for the religious texts of ancient worldviews.


              It is far less useful to talk about a place of frictionless spheres than it is to measure the resistance of various substances against, say, a single rock, in a controlled manner. Build your theory on the rock, not the void, lest you lose your connection to truth through lack of experimental results. Otherwise even the truths you discover will be despised, as is anything mixed with lies and fanciful speculation.
              I believe he hit a few home runs. Leucretius is going to be far from accurate on many things. More accurate then the Bible or anything else written at the time. This is first century BCE
              Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-15-2014, 06:03 PM.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                No, I just think it is an interesting part of his theory. I've even seen some people compare it to QM.
                Sorry I misunderstood your point, but I do not believe his observation were intended for QM, but made on a larger scale. He was still a very Newtonian sort of guy.
                Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-15-2014, 05:25 PM.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #9
                  the first coherent explanation of our universe as probably having other worlds like ours, and with life and other intelligent life possible. Very advance viewing the universe as consisting of stars with solar systems. He proposes uniformity in nature. Inspiration for science fiction!


                  Besides, wherever there is matter to hand

                  and place for it, and no cause to prevent it,

                  the matter must indeed turn into things.

                  For if the number of elemental bodies

                  is such that a whole age could not reckon it up

                  and if the force of nature remains the same

                  to throw the wandering elements to and fro

                  in the same way as here, it must be admitted

                  there are other worlds in other parts of the universe

                  and other races of men and of wild beasts.
                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-15-2014, 05:29 PM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    Sorry I misunderstood your point, but I do not believe his observation were intended for QM, but made on a larger scale. He was still a very Newtonian sort of guy.
                    Oh, sure, no one would hear of QM for another 2,000 years. But any Naturalist system needs some element of random creativity or a final cause of some sort.
                    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                      Oh, sure, no one would hear of QM for another 2,000 years. But any Naturalist system needs some element of random creativity or a final cause of some sort.
                      I actually missed this. I disagree that nature needs a necessary final cause of some sort. I believe nature has a cause in Creation, but it does not need one based on the evidence.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Also a little wisdom to share.

                        “...nothing is more blissful than to occupy the heights effectively fortified by the teaching of the wise, tranquil sanctuaries from which you can look down upon others and see them wandering everywhere in their random search for the way of life, competing for intellectual eminence, disputing about rank, and striving night and day with prodigious effort to scale the summit of wealth and to secure power."

                        O minds of mortals, blighted by your blindness! Amid what deep darkness and daunting dangers life’s little day is passed! To think that you should fail to see that nature importantly demands only that the body may be rid of pain, and that the mind, divorced from anxiety and fear, may enjoy a feeling of contentment!”

                        Titus Lucretius Carus, On the Nature of the Universe
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Interesting comment on the nature of infinite. Can you measure anything from any where in the infinite greater cosmos? Are 'actual infinities' meaningful at all in deterring ultimately what is infinite and what is not?

                          “There can be no center in infinity.”

                          ― Titus Lucretius Carus, On the Nature of the Universe
                          Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-04-2015, 05:57 PM.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            I actually missed this. I disagree that nature needs a necessary final cause of some sort. I believe nature has a cause in Creation, but it does not need one based on the evidence.
                            Which is why I said 'or'.
                            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              'Nothing can be created from nothing.'

                              'Tempests, and bright lightnings, are to be sung; their nature is to be told, and from what cause they pursue their course; lest, having foolishly divided the heaven into parts, you should be anxious as to the quarter from which the flying flame may come, or to what region it may betake itself; and tremble to think how it penetrates through walled enclosures, and how, having exercised its power, it extricates itself from them. Of which phenomena the multitude can by no means see the causes, and think that they are accomplished by supernatural power.'

                              Lucretius
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 03:18 PM
                              0 responses
                              14 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-17-2020, 05:11 PM
                              7 responses
                              37 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-09-2020, 09:25 PM
                              0 responses
                              22 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by rogue06, 10-09-2020, 03:29 PM
                              6 responses
                              52 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-07-2020, 12:11 PM
                              0 responses
                              10 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X