[noemon]

Egyptian Civilization run its life-course back then, also up until the modern-day the rise and fall of civilizations depended on more things than simply advanced warfare or siege weapons, it also depended on the ability of the generals, on natural causes, the eruption of Thera in Greece which caused the collapse of the Mycenean civilization sent volcanic pieces flying into the air from Greece to China, it was like several nuclear bombs and caused floods everywhere even in Russia.

Anyway, the reason why Greek civilization is celebrated as superior in the world in the modern times and by all the elites who have come into contact with it is one.

All civilizations build what they need, they learn what they need to survive, they need tools they build tools, they need siege weapons they research methods to make them stronger, they need letters to keep financial records they invent markings on the wall. The Greeks though were the first in the world to go beyond that, to theorise and to learn things that have no practical application whatsoever, if the Greeks did know about the bloody supernovas, what were they going to do with it? Find another planet to migrate? When the Greeks met the Persians, Greek astronomy had developed so much to the point of the mundane, to the point that noone understands it, to the point that farmers don't need that point to the point of mathematics. Abstract thought the basis of ontology and philosophy is a particularly Greek invention without which these astronomical observations are not possible as such the Persians could not participate in this kind of science because they did not have the necessary tools to do so. Noone else could until the Renaissance and again because of the Greeks and not due to independent creation. This learning made the Romans & the Byzantines the master builders of history and the longest standing state in history but even that was not enough to ensure global domination for ever. It also had to do with the fact that everyone has attacked them, literally, most of the times alltogether as well.

[anasawad]

Quite interesting points actually, though i don't think only the Greeks did it, i mean all other ancient empire practically expanded and researched into things they
don't need.

[noemon]

The point of all of this is that this has marked a new age in our evolution, an age which gives you the opportunity to be the one to discover a mystery and to participate in the evolutionary development of the human species by devoting yourself to math & physics and not to the Q'uran which has absolutely nothing to give you.

"Things they do not need" is a wrong term to use but seemed fitting, these are ontological questions which you can only discover not told.

[anasawad]

Well, to be fair , i mentioned the Quran because the topic is religious, but in reality the topic was not about Quran, posters simply turned it about the Quran while
i used the Quran as an example to explain the full idea.

The original topic i intended was :

the Hidden Books or the Hidden knowledge and Secrets.

These Books are the Book of Al-Jafr and the Book of Al-Jamia.

these books were passed down to each Imam until reaching Imam Al-mehdi and disappearing with hem in the "minor appearance".

-All the legal verdicts that people need to know.

-In it is everything necessary for mankind until the end of time and all the sciences.

But the world has a large set of religions which a good portion of them simply doesn't follow one god to begin with

something would push the people to a situation of 2 and only 2 options

what type of secret knowledge that would cause this effect and subsequently drive humanity towards its end ?.

And the only answer to the intended topic was this

then it's simple: a threat.

No elaboration after this point.
But the idea is that the atmosphere of the world would be set when all science and secrets of the world are revealed, it might be a threat,
but whats the logical one to assume and how could the revealing of all science cause it ?

Which is why i said this:

This thread should've been posted in philosophy forum .

[noemon]

I think I answered all your questions especially the last ones and why the 'secret' which you are looking for which divides the human is the one I told you, man cannot be in the pursuit of knowledge for the sake of knowledge and be an actively participating member in a religion or even an ideology, it is noetically impossible(because he soon realises and sees them for what they are) and that is why political religious/ideological affiliation exists to cater for the contradiction without threatening the existence of affiliations. And that is why fundamentalists in all 3 major religions have called this pursuit "satanic" because before the invention of political religion, they knew that they stand to lose the very foundations of their communities and lead to the questioning of their own existence and whatever threatens your own existence can only be "satanic", "divisive", "destructive". First comes the Self.

Of course we all believe that it is possible and that we can do it, but that is only a lie we tell to ourselves precisely because we do not do that, we do not participate in this noetic evolutionary development, we do not pursue to add knowledge except for very few tiny exceptions, for example there is noone in here(including myself) and the forum contains a diversity of people.

[Harmattan]

The Ptolemaic concentric circles are integrated within Islam in a language that is simple and peasant-like but the knowledge of the concentric circles is there.

Given that all sources I found about this topic are contradictory and give different interpretations, the writing was probably not that simple.

Funny because the Ptolemaic system at least, while erroneous, was at least know at the time the Koran was written. As opposed to nucleosynthesis, big bang and black holes.

The most amazing secret that I believe the ancient Greeks knew regarding the stars is the evolution of the earth. We know now that the Earth is made out of minerals most particularly Iron, we know today that for Iron to come into existence it needs to be cooked in the cosmic supernova furnaces at least 4 times during the process called today cosmic recycling. That is a star explodes and releases particles, these particles later become stars on their own, they explode and they release difference particles, the 4th time they will release Iron. This is according to modern day astronomy.

No, this is not how it works.

For the start there are multiple sequences of events that lead to Iron formation, not a single one. Then the one you had in mind is a five to four-stage reaction chain that takes place at the end of a single massive star's lifespan, where we successfully encounter the helium, neon, carbon and silicon burning processes (the helium itself being produced through other processes, but mostly in the early days of the star). And all of that occurs before the supernova stage and whether this stage occurs or not. And it does not involve other stars.

But even if what you wrote had been correct, the fact that you saw a proof that ancient Greeks knew about nucleosynthesis after you saw the number four in two different places leave me in awe. SERIOUSLY FOR FUCK'S SAKE?!

[noemon]

4 sequences/generations for the iron element to forge in a work titled The Cosmogony in the 7th BCE and 4 sequences/generations for the Iron element to forge in supernova furnaces in modern-day cosmogony. Iron being the age we live in for the Cosmogony and iron being the fundamental element of our universal age for modern-day science. Tell me honestly, how fascinating is this to you? I can imagine how unbelievable it sounds.

This is the documentary that gave me the idea edited: about iron being given its proper place in ancient greek cosmology & chemistry and made me think about this, go to the 18th minute onwards.

[youtube]C1XAKsf1-qY[/youtube]

Funny because the Ptolemaic system at least, while erroneous, was at least know at the time the Koran was written.

This is quite arrogant, the Ptolemaic model is not wrong and neither is the current model, they are both approximation models that do their job as described in the manual, the current model is simply slightly more advanced than the Ptolemaic model and the current model will also be replaced by a better model.
The ancient Greeks calculated the exact circumference of the earth(without traversing it) and everyone else did that in the 15th century when the Greeks migrated west, that does not mean that in the 15th century you discovered everything they already had, nor is there anything to suggest that even today everything have been re-discovered especially when other discoveries happened later on, in the 17th, 19th centuries, developments that should have happened in the 15th if we took the simplistic view of the Renaissance as a unique event that confirmed or advanced all of the observations at once. This is a process, the process of westernization and by westernization I mean the type that Japan imitated from the west and not modern Hollywood.

[Harmattan]

Tell me honestly, how fascinating is this to you? I can imagine how unbelievable it sounds.

Not only I do not see anything interesting in this coincidence that further lies on a partial and simplistic view of actual processes, but the fact that you find it puzzling and want to see more than a coincidence actually makes me question your sanity and reasoning capacities.

I do not say this to offense you but because I think I must tell you.

This is quite arrogant

My purpose was not to minimize the admirable achievements of the ancient Greeks but to contrast the alleged divine nature of the Islamic scriptures with the erroneous premises of the described model, based on geometric elegance rather than physical laws.

[noemon]

I appreciate that but I also believe that arrogance alone is the reason why you are not giving this much thought. Please note that I have not made a statement of what this means scientifically or what is required to reach to this observation but I do not think that the statement made of iron is coincidental in a work titled cosmogony, a statement which is confirmed by modern cosmological observations, that the iron age is the age that our earth lives into in terms of its cosmic stages.

for example, atomism was found to be correct approximately 2000 years after it was first proposed by Leucippus and his pupil Democritus.[15]

If this is true for atomism, then why would you think it far fetched for them to have known the importance of iron in our cosmological age in a book that states that is making a cosmological statement, when they also tell you the thing that they supposedly do not know and when they are in fact considered the original natural scientists?

It would be an injustice not to consider this option and quite honestly this is something that nobody has told me, nor have I ever read it anywhere, I saw that documentary, I recalled Hesiod and I made the connection. That's it, no more no less.

I think we are simply having a moment like one of the moments the people that discovered the theory of atoms had when they also saw it written and made the connection and went like "no...this can't be" or the people who traversed the globe and confirmed the ancient greek figure to the decimal.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

This is quite arrogant, the Ptolemaic model is not wrong and neither is the current model, they are both approximation models that do their job as described in the manual, the current model is simply slightly more advanced than the Ptolemaic model and the current model will also be replaced by a better model.

The only thing the Ptolemaic model does right is approximate the direction of the planets. It gets the distances to them - both absolute and relative to each other - hopelessly wrong. The difference of the Copernican model was far more than just "slightly more advanced". The Keplerian model might be said to be slightly more advanced than Copernicus's, and with general relativity there was another slight advance on that, but the Ptolemaic model was indeed fundamentally wrong about the positions of the planets.

[noemon]

The Ptolemaic model was not the only model though, it was simply the model of choice for the community because it was simple and sufficient for their use of practical applications. The Heliocentric model also existed within the same tradition. And no serious philosopher of science is going to tell you that the Ptolemaic model was wrong or that the Copernicus model is not wrong. These are laymans terms and erroneously used at that.

All the models are correct from their point of reference and wrong for other points of reference, changing the point of reference changes the model completely for good in some cases and for bad in other cases, this remains true for all the modern iterations with the margin of error reduced every time, which is great but does not make the previous iterations false, nor the current ones right, therefore this dichotomy of right & wrong does not actually exist and as such has no particular value.

The Ptolemaic model is true because the earth does spin around itself, the heliocentric model is also true because the earth also spins around the sun, does not mean it does not spin around itself(and as such act as a referential point), in actual fact though neither the earth nor the sun are centres of anything other than their own selves and both referential points are particularly true within a certain context but generally false from 'the objective' point of view, which has yet to be discovered.

[Zamuel]

The Priest, the Hierach and the Hierophant.

I will tell you this much: From -Atlantis- a Song by Donovan Leitch

Knowing her fate, Atlantis sent out ships to all corners of the Earth. On board were the Twelve:

The poet, the physician, The farmer, the scientist, The magician and the other so-called Gods of our legends.
Though Gods they were -

And as the elders of our time choose to remain blind Let us rejoice, And let us sing, And dance, and ring in the new,

Hail Atlantis!

This knowledge that they learned from the Greco-Romans like the Ptolemaic circles they integrated them in the Holy Books because that scientific theory was in fashion during their days.

And they still don't get it ...

Zam

[neopagan]

I unequivocally reject the belief in the existence of any kind of secret knowledge pertaining to reality or the origin of the universe, religious, spiritual, metaphysical or otherwise. No human being is capable of knowing anymore about these things than any other. The lie that applies a hierarchy of secret knowledge has been used to establish control by the few over the many since God was a boy. I have edited this with respect to the OP

[noemon]

Yah man, I'm sure we all know everything the physicists know, or that the aboriginals know everything about civilization that we do but they simply choose to ignore it.

[Harmattan]

If this is true for atomism, then why would you think it far fetched for them to have known the importance of iron in our cosmological age in a book that states that is making a cosmological statement

The atom was a reasonable hypothesis. Knowing that there exists a four-stage reaction chain that can take place at some point in some stars is not something one can guess, it requires a deep understanding of nuclear fusion and star formation.

The idea that ancient Greeks could have hypothesized the latter is as absurd as the idea that a dog could have discovered the possibility of growing silicon crystals to build microprocessors out of them.

And Iron has no special role in astrophysics, it is simply the heaviest element that can be produced by silicon burning, one of the many nucleosynthesis processes. I didn't watch your documentary (too long and boring: I started my career as a physicist) but either it is stupid either you got it all wrong.

And no serious philosopher of science is going to tell you that the Ptolemaic model was wrong or that the Copernicus model is not wrong. These are laymans terms and erroneously used at that.

It is a model that puts Earth at the center of the universe and makes everything revolve in circles around it because circles are the perfect shape.

Yes it is fucking erroneous by all definitions of erroneous.

No it is not just an approximation, even though it incidentally produces some approximate enough results (and a lot more completely wrong results of course). And it's fine like this, it doesn't make the ancient Greeks' historic contribution less important.

[noemon]

The atom was a reasonable hypothesis.

Is that why it was confirmed 2000 years later?

The idea that ancient Greeks could have hypothesized the latter...

But they have stated that thing explicitly, that according to you they could not have known.

And Iron has no special role in astrophysics, it is simply the heaviest element that can be produced by silicon burning, one of the many nucleosynthesis processes.

It is the fundamental element of the earth and it marks the universal age of the earth in modern-day cosmology, it marked the universal age for Hesiod too. This is extremely fascinating if you stop being a negative pansy and simply ponder on it.

It is a model that puts Earth at the center of the universe and make everything revolves in circles around it because circle are the perfect shape.

Yes it is fucking erroneous by all definitions of erroneous.

All the models are erroneous, ALL of them, including relativity, including Kepler's model, there is no model that is perfectly correct. But they are all true within their hypothesis and they are true as along as you use them correctly and as long as you are aware of their limitations. I do not see your point, what does that have to do with anything? Greek science is not only responsible for the Ptolemaic earth-centric model but also for the heliocentric model. The fame and usage of the Ptolemaic model against the better helio-centric model was a matter of choice, not truth. The Ptolemaic model served peoples basic needs better than the heliocentric model. The Greeks openly discussed both models, fully aware of their limitations.

[Harmattan]

Is that why it was confirmed 2000 years later?

Hypothesizing it was easy. Proving it was very difficult and required a lot of very advanced knowledge to be developed beforehand. I fail to see how this would prove the ancient Greeks had superpowers or mysterious unknown knowledge that allowed them to know the inside of nuclear fusion.

But they have stated that thing explicitly

Only in your imagination.

It is the fundamental element of the earth

What ?! oO
What does "fundamental element" even mean? And how would Iron be more important for the Earth than Carbon or Silicon?

and it marks the universal age of the earth in modern-day cosmology

What ?! oO
What does "universal age" even mean? And how is Iron related to that? Are you referring to the use of lead in meteorites that are incidentally iron-rich to conclude that iron has some mystical role in cosmology?!

This is extremely fascinating if you stop being a negative pansy and simply ponder on it.

Trust me: it's only in your head. You had take off to some place far away from us.

All the models are erroneous, ALL of them, including relativity, including Kepler's model, there is no model that is perfectly correct.

Relativity reused as is most of the laws, definitions and principles known before Einstein, and it only corrected or generalized a few things. The substrate was approximate but correct, and it is still widely taught and used. And it will always be.

This is not true at all with the Ptolemaic system which only worked for a few cases and was based on spiritual considerations. Nothing was kept from this system and it is no longer taught, or only for the historical perspective.

[noemon]

Hypothesizing it was easy. Proving it was very difficult and required a lot of very advanced knowledge to be developed beforehand. I fail to see how this would prove the ancient Greeks had superpowers or mysterious unknown knowledge that allowed them to know the inside of nuclear fusion.

First of all you are making massive leaps of logic that noone has claimed. Trying to set-up powerful straw-men there.

Only in your imagination.

Excuse me mate, but Hesiod in his work Cosmogony explicitly said that this age we/they live in is the Iron Age. And modern cosmologists in absolute agreement with Hesiod have verified that the earth is composed mainly of iron, which also marks the age of the earth's components during their cooking in supernova. And the 2 ages fully agree with each other. If you tried to think about that instead of trying to set-up straw-men, we would not be having this conversation. As you know I am not a physicist to be able to express this observation very well but this is irrelevant to the observation itself.

What does "universal age" even mean? And how is Iron related to that? Are you referring to the use of lead in meteorites that are incidentally iron-rich to conclude that iron has some mystical role in cosmology?!

I am not claiming any mystical role for iron. Watch 10 minutes of the documentary from minute 18 to 28 and you will understand possibly better than me what I am trying to express. Scientists looking for a new earth are looking for planets that have the same composite elements, and that main element is iron.

The substrate was approximate but correct, and it is still widely taught and used.

What substrate, the heliocentric model you mean? Because if you are to argue that the Sun is the centre of the universe which you are aware that it is not, then I do not see with what face can you mock the hypothesis that the earth is the centre of the universe, when we know that are both definitely wrong. I am pretty sure you understand my point but you have put your warrior gear on. Take the gear off, chill and we will discuss rather than argue.

[Zamuel]

Yah man, I'm sure we all know everything the physicists know, or that the aboriginals know everything about civilization that we do but they simply choose to ignore it.

Actually, the Abos know things we don't ...

Secret Knowledge isn't really secret ... it's staring you right in the face all the time ... you just don't know what you're looking at. And when someone points it out to you, you go ape shit crazy on em ... Velikovski, the guy who correctly predicted the retrograde rotation of Venus, believed the Humans Species had been traumatized to the point of an inbred psychological complex that rejects the traumatic experience, or anything significantly related to it. One reason the Flat Earth concept survived over a millennium after being disproven. Just the mention of the NAME Velikovski here will probably elicit some derisive responses ... The present concept of the Sol systems evolution is about on par with that old helio-centric theological cosmology.

Zam

[neopagan]

The OP claims that the Koran holds scientific knowledge unknowable when it was written. Every time the details of Koran are discussed by non-Muslims, any conclusion not fitting the Muslim sensibility is put down to misinterpretation. If it is that vague about the nature of reality, it is not scientific knowledge.

Albert Einstein is famous for developing a general theory of relativity. The absence of an earlier explanation does not mean that his revelation had been secret-knowledge. In primitive cultures, secret knowledge is superstition, without exception. In the times when the ability to read was limited to a privileged few, complex written material was used to bamboozle the uninitiated. Even with the ability to read, this stale trick still works on a lot of people.

Reality is not an esoteric experience. Those who wish to say it is, belittle their own intelligence. They also form a large audience for self-help books, bogus revelations such as those of Eric von Daniken, and works on alien abduction or the Bermuda Triangle. The Koran is just another of these books.

A classic work on “secret knowledge,” is the Urantia Book, a maniacal rewriting of Christian mythology the size of a telephone book. If you wade through it, you will be “astonished” with its conclusion. God as a father figure.

I will never get those hours back.