Extracted text
In the orbit of the sun there are four prime points or centers; photoic, scotoic, caloric and cruosic. These four primary energies and influences follow one another in the gyre of the solar motion. Their action is as if there were four gyres successively following one another in the order of photoic energy {lumen, light), caloric energy (thermos, heat), scotoic energy (the energy of darkness), and cruosic energy (crystalline or frigid energy). Four distinct helices of energy are winding their course and exercising their co-ordinate and antithetical influences upon the surfaces they touch and the substances they penetrate, day after day, in the perpetual solar gyre.
Suppose we take the axis, the poles of which are heat and cold; the heat and cold points or poles being completely opposite. The tendency of the gyre of calorine is to perpetually expand as Helios (the sun) winds his never-ceasing spire. Following this course, twelve hours behind, cruosine, the freezing energy or the energy of crystallization, exerts its contracting force as Helios winds his way. Here, then, we have the application of the law of pulsation as regular as the expansion and contraction of the heart beat in the human body, and from the corresponding law in the alchemicoorganic domain to that operative in the domain of the organovital sphere. We are not only enabled to observe the application of the principles of expansion and contraction, alternately applied in solar influence through the penetration of these solar energies, but we also find herein the law of insulation. The radiation of heat is cut off in the direction of the cruosic gyre, reflected back upon itself, and compelled to take a lengthwise accelerated course, producing friction and therefore the generation of magnetic energy of the terrestrial quality,«as coutradistinct to that of celestial origin.
Continued.
Correspondence.
The great difficulty with the general reader is that he is not critical. In our illustration, page 387 of the FLAMING SWORD, (June 24) we stated that "on the basis of the supposition that space is illimitable, let us imagine two stars so far distant from the observer as to appear one, though a million miles distant from each other." We supposed a case merely for argument's sake. The principle is the same, whether the stars are a million miles or two feet apart. We were demonstrating the fact that the law of the foreshortening of space, or a thing observed in space, accounted for what is usually attributed to convexity, as in the case of the ship mast at sea. The same inquirer, G. W. K., propounds again the same old inquiry: "Why do the masts and spars of a great ship first become visible?" He means on the approach of a ship. The question has been answered in the FLAMING SWORD a great many times. We reply, once again, that it is because visual foreshortening curves the visual line. In vol. V., No. 25, (June 24) we have given a very clear diagrammatic illustration of foreshortening as the cause of the appearance.
Again our inquirer asks: "On the supposition that the Copernican theory is not true, how can astronomers have predicted by these laws, the existence, and directed to the point in the heavens, the exact point where planets have been discovered?" Waiving the matter of the grammatical construction of the above, we think the reader can understand what is implied in the question. We look into the heavens and see a brilliant star observed apparently at an exact point. (Anyone not acquainted with its character would say, as the inquirer remarks, it is exactly located.) We now bring a telescope to bear, and find that the apparent star is two instead of one and that, on the assumption of modern astronomy, they occupy two places, millions of miles distant; that is, two points exactly located. These two points, now exactly located, may still appear as two, even under the influence of powerful telescopes; but, by and by, the magnifying diameter of a telescope is very greatly enlarged, and each of the two stars is resolved into a group of stars separated from each other by thousands of miles. Allow us to ask: "Did the original observation, or the second or the third one, exactly locate the star? "If so, it passes our comprehension. Then again the Chaldean astronomers as accurately predicted and located the stars as do the modern astronomers. Did the accuracy of their predictions demonstrate the truth of their theories? The Ptolemaic astronomers not only made as accurate calculations and predictions as the modern astronomers mak", but promulgated the mathematical rules employed in the present calculus. Did the accuracy of their calculations and predictions prove the truth of the Ptolemaic theory of astronomy?
If the mathematician will enter into a calculus, the basis of which is the concavity of the earth—estimated at eight inches or nearly that to the mile—and measure a distance on that concavity one hundred miles, the course of which is in a line with the orbit of some star that he may locate, calculating that the one hundred miles is a twentyfive hundredth part of the circle—and then assume that two lines directed from the two extremes of the one hundred miles will converge to a point at the center of the sphere, the distance of which is four thousand miles, he may note the time of the passage of the star across the space of the two lines, and calculate the time of its reappearance at t'ie same point. This calculation, because correct, would not prove the earth to be concave. The same calculation may be made on the supposition that the earth is convex—the corresponding lines being divergent, and the distance almost incalculable—and the exact time may be predicted when the star gets back to the denoted spot. This would not prove the earth to be convex, nor the Copernican system correct.
The Flaming Sword · Vol. 6, No. 2 · July 1893 · PDF p. 7