skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

plasma in the zodiak

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 3:32 am    Post subject: plasma in the zodiak Reply with quote

I'm not sure if this seems relevant to anyone but I figured I'd see if anyone was interested, or could perhaps direct me to any extra resources. Im curious if anyone has any information regarding plasma in astrology, that is from a credible source.

I have a theory regarding the elements that is no where near complete but to give you the basics,
-the triplicities and quadruplicities and their relationships explain the entire universe.(already pretty established thought in astrology)
-I am NOT convinced that plasma is the fourth phase/state
-I believe the zodiak element "fire" does not represent fire, but heat instead. Fire itself is the 'transition' that occures before the elements change their compositions and/or states, its a reaction.
-In a very basic nut shell:

Earth=Physical Elements/Chemicle compounds
Air=Pressure
Fire=Heat
Water=Direction/Flow

I know that many would attribute Plasma to Fire as the 'fourth element' but like I said, I don't believe its a state or phase, Im leaning towards the idea that plasma is more like the universes riverbed, it creates the boundries for the energy to flow, thereby associating it with water....

This is about as simple as I can make this crazy subject, any thoughts:) Has anyone ever heard this or read this somewhere??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Borealis,


There are very few things I know less about than physics. I have been trying to get my head around what you mean but I am having a little trouble. It seems that you are trying to correlate the four elements in the Aristotlean sense with the four states of matter in the physics sense. As we know, the Aristotlean view of elements, and the astrological view, if you like, consist of fire, air, water and earth. The four states of matter in the sense of physics are solids, liquids, gas and plasma. Are you saying that the four states of matter correlate to the four elements but that you believe plasma is related to water rather than fire? If so, how do you suggest fire correlates? I.e. if you are seeing a direct correlation between the two groups and if plasma is water then what would correlate to liquids.

When you say that the zodiacal element of fire does not represent fire but rather heat you are, in a sense, correct. Fire is hot and dry but heat predominates. Air is hot and wet but moisture predominates, etc. etc. According to the theory, each element can be transformed into another element through the quality they possess in common. Fire becomes air through the action of heat, etc. Aristotle believed that all physical manifestations in the world are composed of all four elements in different proportions. The varying amount of each element in the composition accounts for the infinite variety of things. In terms of plasma, gas becomes plasma when the addition of heat causes a significant number of atoms to release all or some of their electrons. But I do not see that we can use a direct correlation between the elements and these states of matter. Plasma makes up about 99% of the universe. If plasma creates the boundaries for the energy to flow then wouldn’t this mean that plasma is not one of these energies but rather a conduit for them, so to speak? And if water is moist and cold and plasma needs heat to be created, how can they be related other than as part of the cycle that turns one into the other? As I said, I know very little about this so I am just asking questions not challenging your view.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Physics Definition of Plasma is a gas made up of electrons and ions.

then there is blood Plasma, which is a somewhat visicuous yellow liquid.

for most elements to get to the Physics Plasma stage they have to be superheated, but different elements respond to things differently so that isn't necessarily the case. Plasma in the phyics sense is a STATE, not an element, as in solid, liquid, gas, plasma.

In the Biological sense, not sure what Culpepper associates it with.

If you are talking about Flat panel Plasma display's that is a type of display made up of a layer of gas between two glass plates. The glass is coated with parallel conductors that form cells which, when energized, produce a gas discharge that makes up one element of a dot-matrix display.

so first we need to know whether you are discussing State? Biology? this newer technology which is really state, though you could be wondering about the particular gas? or???

Like the word Quantum, Plasma has been used to mean things it doesn't mean, etc...

Granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it is very clear from the post that Borealis is talking about plasma as the fourth state of matter and not plasma screen television or blood plasma.

Borealis, I think I misunderstood what you were trying to say. I reread what you have written and it seems that you are saying that you don't believe plasma is a state of matter at all. As I said, I do not have the knowledge to really comment on anything of a physics nature. I thought you were trying it correlate the elements with each state of matter but that plasma was water rather than the fire that most people assume it to be. The funny thing is that fire is not considered to be plasma at all by the physicists.

Quote:
Im leaning towards the idea that plasma is more like the universes riverbed, it creates the boundries for the energy to flow, thereby associating it with water....


Now this sounds similar to blood plasma, which is the matter that serves as a transport medium for carrying blood cells. It is primarily made up of water.

I am still curious as to whether you are attempting to correlate the elements with the states of matter in any way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Coder



Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 143

Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here you go folks, chomp on this: http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/universe.html.
Another interesting place is http://www.holoscience.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

-------------I've edited and earased this explanainition because it was way too long and confusing. I have never tried ti explain this stuff in writing, only math:)..I will work on putting my thoughts together a little more smoothly.----------------

Last edited by borealis on Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You misunderstand me, I am saying plasma is a state NOT an element. Ergo I'm confused by your question.

Granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, Im gonna try again. Sorry all, its easier to draw diagrams. What I am trying to do is put astrology in science terms. I should be able to start with a basic astrology wheel that matches a basic physics cycle and the answers to the equations should both equal the same thing.
Sue, you are understanding exactly what my confusion is. Fire is not considered a plasma and so why would plasma be considered a fire. And yes, I am both disagreeing with the idea that plasma is a state and I am trying to associate plasma with water:)

The elements of astrology are often associated with the phases/states of matter. Like sue said, "Aristotle believed that all physical manifestations in the world are composed of all four elements in different proportions." I totally believe this! So, much, that I want to physically prove it...with math and physics and the astro wheel.

Problem 1.

If we associate the quaduplicities with four states of matter, then we had better find some more quadruplicities because there are more than four states of matter recognized.

Plasma describes a state that has no bond, just like gas. It has to be recognized differently than gas though because it described a state that allows the electrons to go free, to act as free radicals wich is different than gas.

Gluons are between Neutrons and Protons, Quarks are inside them. Quark-gluon plasma allows the quarks and gluons to loose their bond and fly around. It is also a different state of matter, Now what do we do??

I propose to simply define states of matter as bond, loose bond and no bond. The triplicities explain natural state, morphing state and changed state. These alternate behaviours of electrical charge can be associated with their own triplicities of neutral, positive and negative charge and their intensities and differences from stable to erratic shown in Terms.

Problem 2.

Associating the quadrupllicities with states of matter confuses a lot of our other beliefs. For example the 4 humours are all liquids, why are they not water??? Obviously we understand (as astrologers) why they are different but if you were to try and attach a mathmatical formula to explain this, you will always fail because all liquids would seem to have to land in water. How does the diamond end up in a fire sign, it is not plasmic, or even hot!?? Does Ice end up in earth because it solid?? No. We must have an explaination that can marriage our ideas with current scientific knowledge.

I propose a solution with an energy type model. I have the freedom to use actual existing variables and math formulas. I do not need to know alll the answers because one or two variables will tell me the others automatically. I also have the freedom to have my answer lie anywhere in the zodiak. "All four of these elements combined in different proportions" will mathmatically give one spot of the zodiak. That spot will then be the new stable point.

That new spot, describes the specific combination and allows you to predict its reactions when changed again. It does one other major thing though that no other science could do, it's new spot also automatically gives you clues to its new purpose in life...it main goal. This type of math decides what the ruler of that combination is as well, something we seem to have lost. Math like this, makes astrologers weathermen, still a hit or miss but close enough to call it science and pour billions into its research. (This part is near impossible to explain whithout math and diagrams, sorry)

Problem 3.

Even if we do decide to accept plasma as the fourth state and ignore the above connundrums, plasma is still actual physical matter too. Our techniques of associating matter with signs, like I already explained, is not always just what 'state' its in, we also take into account its purpose. I believe plasma may be more in water but simply can not decide! And so far, all the math that I have been able to come up with points to water. Therefore, asking for some other suggestions and reasonings:)

I believe the 'proof' of astrology lies in not trying to prove our prediction skills but being able to prove that it is physically possible. I really want to seperate the science of astrology from the art of predicting much like the science world can accept the difference between meterology and the accurracy of their reports.

Oh, and the next time someone says to you astrology doesnt work because its not 100% accurate with predictions, tel them, "Meterology must be a sham because the weather man said it wasnt gonna rain!"

P.S. If you feel that my philosophy on this is totally out the window, than be all means attack..I don;t mind:) I am especially interested in if anyone feels that my ideas would compromise astrology because that is not my purpose. Fire is a whole other thing that I'd like to get into too, no time now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oh, also, Nothing I am saying is really original. It can all pretty much be found in the ancient alchemy texts. The alchemist were I believe our original sources of the elements.

good alchemy site: http://www.alchemywebsite.com/index.html

They describe the elements as qualities, not states of matter so I am curious as to when this started happenning? Water being liquid, Fire being plasmic??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Plasma is fluid in state as is glass, so makes sense to me (you'd be surprised how many people dont know Glass is a viscuous liquid, sigh)

Science in its simplest terms is observation and repeatable demonstration.

You've observed that Plasma behaves like a liquid (though it does have some gaseous qualities) and question why one would align it with fire.

I'm not certain anything else is needed? (just putting the thought out there)

though as a state, it does have some differences than liquid, I would still more comonly think of it as acting like liquid than gas.

Granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated