Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00082)

At 05:10 AM 5/2/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Here is a little snippet from another list that caught my eye. Rather
>interesting, what.
>
>Bee:

This is a good article and Sally though "Physics Challanged" (as I am) did a
good job of quoting it exactly.

This is the kind of information, coupled with what I've read of the work of
Werner Heisenburg and those following his lead, along with the writings of
Stephen Hawking, that has led me to the view I hold on the "science'in the
Secret Doctrine. It is information like this that I am going to be using in
the "Concordance" I'm going to write when I get through the book I'm
currently working on.

What information like this says to me that in our universe, the only
certainty is uncertainty, and therefore any rigidly paradigmetric system is
probably wrong. The Secret Doctrine, it seems to me, is as rigid a cosmic
paradigm as that of the absolute materialists or the fundamentalist
Christians and is therefore very questionable. In a cosmos whose only
certainty is uncertainty the complicated hierarchy based details of the
Secret Doctrine just don't make much sense.

I have a friend who designed the Viking Lander, when I have time, I'm going
to look him up and engage him to be a technical advisor for the
"Concordance".What I'd really like to do is create a small committee of
highly accredited scientific types to serve as an advisory committee for the
book. (No Theologians need apply.) When I'm done, I want it to be a group
effort, and I want it to ettle the question as much as anything can ever be
settled in a world wherein uncertainty rules.

alexis d.