top of page
to no. 5
I Ching
to no. 7
Dynamic Organization
[06] Cosmology
[Astrophysics]
ABSAdomain no.: 6
[Primary] Knowledge type: Conventional
Role in ABSAprime's worldview: Low [but Growing]
ABSAlink(s): TBA [via ABSAdomain interaction]
Degree of Difficulty: Very Difficult
“I think nature's imagination is so much greater than man's, she's never going to let us relax.” -- Richard Feynman
"We could be in the middle of an intergalactic conversation…and we wouldn’t even know.”-- Michio Kaku
“The universe does not behave according to our preconceptions. It continues to surprise us. The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” -- Stephen Hawking
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.” -- Albert Einstein
There's a saying (we forget its origin) that goes like, "Not only is the Universe stranger than we imagine, it's likely stranger than we can imagine." That wry assessment is a testimonial to the power of what we don't know and how that lack of knowledge can lure us into making unwarranted assumptions that constrain our growth as psychically-enabled beings. One of the biggest arenas for this to occur is to examine our place within the universe (that's the "so above" in our formula, the place where we direct our tools, our "as below"), where (especially based on more recent evidence) we apparently know...next to nothing. Okay, maybe that's a little extreme :-) However...
Who's afraid of the "dark"?
To take a well-known example, one puzzling aspect of what we know of the physical universe is that we have never seen, touched, sensed, or known about NEARLY 95% of it. (Ouch: can you say, “Oops!”) That is one of the mysteries surrounding the notorious dark matter (Also involved: dark energy).
Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter that does not seem to interact with electromagnetic fields or light. The intriguing conundrum is that gravitational (and other) effects can't be explained by general relativity theory, unless there is more matter not yet measured…a lot of it!
In one popular standard model of cosmology the mass-energy content of the universe is only 5% "ordinary" matter; the rest is dark matter, combined with dark energy, together comprising 95% of all mass-energy content. Scientists deduce that dark matter exists because, among other things, it is a way of explaining how galaxies rotate and how galaxy clusters move. However, its exact nature still remains one of physical science's most tantalizing mysteries.
However, this has not stopped research science from investing a boatload of money into trying to find out about dark matter (and dark energy). Although total amounts are impossible to determine due to the variety of funding sources, some estimates have the figure at between $300 million to $1 billion USD annually, including some projects, like the James Webb telescope, not directly engineered for this task.
The point is that dark matter is not some fly-by-night strange perspective dreamed up in the ivory tower, even though worthless in itself. This is serious business.
Alchemy + Modern Science: Secret Pals?
From the previous section, we hope you retain the main point. The vast majority of the universe we can't even describe, although some current thinking is questioning the existence and supposed effects of dark matter. As we progress through some of the classical texts on esoteric materials from centuries past, we will find that many of these texts, despite being denigrated and even banned, said essentially the same kinds of things about the universe, being proffered now as "new" discoveries.
In those times, we didn't have the conventional scientific knowledge to fortify what was currently thought at that time, so we must assume that these insights came from something other than empirical science--or at least empirical science as currently practiced--because alchemists and others had ideas like this down cold.
How cold? check out these three common areas of interest between the two perspectives.
-
Both perspectives are thoroughly involved in transformation and metamorphosis. The concept of dark matter transforms our understanding of the universe, positing that what we see and understand about the cosmos is only a very small fraction of what is there. Likewise, alchemy was all in on transformation, not just of materials but also of the spiritual status of the alchemist.
-
Dark matter raises questions about reality and our place in the universe, alerting us to entire realms of existence that stay stubbornly invisible. This pretty much knocks our metaphysical assumptions about the universe into a cocked hat. Alchemy was intertwined with metaphysical riddles, seeking both answers about physical transformation, and equally important, enlightenment, a quest to understand deeper truths about human existence and the cosmos.
-
Both perspectives share a preoccupation with mysteries and the unknown. Dark matter is a major part of the universe, affecting its dynamics and structure, but knowable only through speculation, via its effects on the qualities the Universe is "supposed to" display. This makes it one of the most intriguing scientific mysteries of all time. Alchemy, among other achievements, involved the, frankly to modern sensibilities, bizarre pursuit of turning base metals into gold. This definitely seemed a project grounded in esoteric knowledge, shrouded in secrecy and encoded in arcane symbols, and thus very, very mysterious.
-
Both views are preoccupied with the mysterious unknown. Dark matter is a major part of the universe, affecting its dynamics and structure, but unknown except via speculation on qualities the universe is "supposed to" display. Alchemy involved the, (to modern eyes) bizarre, pursuit of turning base metals into gold, an esoteric project, shrouded in secrecy and encoded in arcane symbols—very, very mysterious.
Finally, remember that, even though alchemy can’t be considered scientific in the modern sense of that word, like chemistry and physics today, it relied extensively on experimentation. Indeed, some have properly pointed out how much "modern" chemistry is indebted to the similar procedures followed by alchemists. More on these absorbing ideas as the site progresses.
"As Below, So Above"
bottom of page