Genesis
These days even among fundamentalist creationists the so called 'young Earthers' are looked upon as being doctrinaire extremists. Perhaps this helps to explain why the handful of us rational immaterialists are so reluctant to follow our own rationale to its logical conclusion which is not at all in harmony with the scientifically correct notion of an old Earth. Anyone, however, who does have the courage of their immaterialist convictions is going to end up right about here. That is the plan, anyway. We will just have to buck up and suck up, and not foul up so we don't have to come back again. We only go around once.
If discretion were the better part of my valor, I might have left this topic alone. The real action in this immaterial cosmos is with the Eschaton. That is the tail that wags this dog. The demand for coherence, however, does not allow me to walk away from the Alpha point of the cosmic equation. Besides this, every engineer knows that a bridge needs two anchor points, and in our case they are the Alpha and the Omega.
Compared to the Eschaton, the Garden of Eden is a literal Sunday school picnic. Where is the Anchor? Where indeed?
In thinking of the duality of the Alpha and Omega, we cannot avoid reflecting on the dynamic duality of God and Atom discussed previously. (I am not the first to have speculated on the Adam--Atom connection.) I would suggest now, however, that this primordial duality is more accurately portrayed as being between God and the mathematical 'Monster' group. This is the duality of the irresistible force and the immovable object. That group seems to have acted as the grain of sand relative to the oyster, we being the resulting best of all possible pearls. Should we then lay awake at night worrying about who created the Monster group? What if there had not been a primordial Monster? Where would that leave us? Anyone who knows the answer deserves the messianic mantle.
We have already noted that the footprint of the Monster is to be found in the depths of the Atom. I will not hesitate long before speculating that the 'monstrous' geometry of the Atom is also reflected in the sacred, sky born geometry of the global megalithic culture. It is as if the starry resonance of those ancient stone monuments were meant precisely, and we do mean precisely, to anchor our geodesics and thereby solidify the Earth from out of our primordial dream-time. Yes, the Alpha Anchor is to be found in Angkor and in Giza.
Can we suppose that the Hamlet's Mill of the mythically recorded precession of the Equinoxes is just a cosmic accident, amidst all this geodesic acumen? Do we really suppose that we lost nothing on our long march into materialism?
The actual time span of creation is framed in the stars. A compromise between the biblical six millennia and the Great Cycle's two dozen, leaves a nice round dozen. If anyone can argue for a better time frame for the immaterial Alpha and Omega (does the extra 'sabbatical' Millennium give us then a baker's dozen?) they are welcome to it. Did not 1998 mark the date of orthogonality of the ecliptic and galactic circles?
And for all the Dino-philes out there, well, why not trust in the teleological bootstrap cloning of a still materializing Dino-DNA sequence. This will be alchemy at its best.
5/30/02