The ancients believed in a divine hand of creation and that planet
orbits were perfect circles in space. God would have it no other way.
Ptolemy devised an earth centered mathematical scheme to fit this
picture. Johannes Kepler sought the evidence for divinity but found
that the planet orbits were ellipses. With Newton the idea of a perfect
Euclidean harmony of form was lost and replaced with a clockwork order
that derived from the planet orbits, which were circles in time.

Like the Early Greeks before them, Kepler and Newton attributed the
(clockwork) order to a divine hand. In 1713, Isaac Newton wrote the
Scholium for the second edition of the Principia. Newton wrote, " This
extraordinary arrangement of the Sun, the planets and the comets can
only have originated in the design and domain of an intelligent and
powerful being. This Being governs everything, not as the soul of the
world, but rather as the lord of all that exists." The mystic today,
like the mystics of yesterday, believe in a creator, and view the
economy of stable system action (circles in time) as a support for its
existence.

It is not within my range of knowledge to determine the cause of the
universe. However, I can show that the order we see is the one order
that is the most likely to not speak to a divine hand.

Consider an imaginary night sky where the planet orbits do not travel
in an efficient elliptic shaped trajectory, much less a perfect spatial
circle. Let's say that the orbits are cyclic and repetitive. Taking the
simplest case for an area enclosing orbit provides a triangle orbit
trajectory. The planet makes its complete cycle enclosing space with
three changes of direction. If such a stable, object-space frame is to
exist, it might be controlled by a time function that results in a
force. If the time function was consistent with regard to all the
planets we would still have a mess on our hands. There are simply no
rational explanations for such a stable space outside an invocation of
God.

The ancients were looking for perfection, where they thought divine
intervention would show its hand. Such a perfection however, is the one
scenario that is the most likely to not show divine intervention. Such
perfection shows an economy of motion. and is a necessary property of
stable systems in general. The
probability for any cyclic system to maintain a sovereign stable state
is dramatically diminished with any increase in untoward, or uneconomic
motion.

wrote in message
ups.com...
The ancients believed in a divine hand of creation and that planet
orbits were perfect circles in space. God would have it no other way.
Ptolemy devised an earth centered mathematical scheme to fit this
picture. Johannes Kepler sought the evidence for divinity but found
that the planet orbits were ellipses.

Ya missed a bit. Copernicus and Galileo.


With Newton the idea of a perfect
Euclidean harmony of form was lost and replaced with a clockwork order
that derived from the planet orbits, which were circles in time.

Like the Early Greeks before them, Kepler and Newton attributed the
(clockwork) order to a divine hand. In 1713, Isaac Newton wrote the
Scholium for the second edition of the Principia. Newton wrote, " This
extraordinary arrangement of the Sun, the planets and the comets can
only have originated in the design and domain of an intelligent and
powerful being. This Being governs everything, not as the soul of the
world, but rather as the lord of all that exists."

Yep, nearly everyone was religious then, or burned as a witch or
heretic.
At the very least there was excommunication, losing all freedom of
speech.
I would have made that story up too, it's basic survival.


The mystic today,
like the mystics of yesterday, believe in a creator, and view the
economy of stable system action (circles in time) as a support for its
existence.

It is not within my range of knowledge to determine the cause of the
universe. However, I can show that the order we see is the one order
that is the most likely to not speak to a divine hand.

Consider an imaginary night sky where the planet orbits do not travel
in an efficient elliptic shaped trajectory, much less a perfect
spatial
circle. Let's say that the orbits are cyclic and repetitive. Taking
the
simplest case for an area enclosing orbit provides a triangle orbit
trajectory. The planet makes its complete cycle enclosing space with
three changes of direction. If such a stable, object-space frame is to
exist, it might be controlled by a time function that results in a
force. If the time function was consistent with regard to all the
planets we would still have a mess on our hands. There are simply no
rational explanations for such a stable space outside an invocation of
God.
Nah, you change the rules, then other rules change too. The triangular
orbit needs no forces. You created the mess. You clean it up.


The ancients were looking for perfection, where they thought divine
intervention would show its hand. Such a perfection however, is the
one
scenario that is the most likely to not show divine intervention. Such
perfection shows an economy of motion. and is a necessary property of
stable systems in general. The
probability for any cyclic system to maintain a sovereign stable state
is dramatically diminished with any increase in untoward, or
uneconomic
motion.
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used
when we created them." - Einstein.
(Probably the truest thing he ever said, he created problems).
Androcles.