The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Okay, Maria, thanks for the above paragraph in answer to what I asked for. The concept of thought experiments is real to me and I can work with that. The concept of traveling somewhere in a system with no time is more difficult to visualize. However, such things as time warps, etc. exist which shed a bit of reality on changing locations without any time passage occurring. Even in relativity theory, traveling at the velocity of light would yield precisely that result. However for a material object to travel at or above light speed is ruled out by the math on which relativity is based. Of course for a non material object, there is no law preventing such an object from exceeding light speed. Thus spirits can theoretically instantly transport to any location, since they have no matter in their composition.
I know that you are not coming at it from a physics point of view but from a Metaphysical point of view, but I see it better if I can see a physics based situation where some unusual thing might be possible. If I can get to that point, then I can cut loose from physics and attempt to look at it from other points of view. I'll kick this around some more and get back to you.
In models of the universe dreamed up by Hubbard, Vinair, Hinduism and other sources, There is a before the beginning period devoid of matter, light, time and such. All that exists in that period is potential cause. Vinnai came up with the concept that cause and effect are two sides of the same coin. This leads to Cause initiating action in itself. This is needed so as to get off of the treadmill where it is always asked what came before Cause, and what came before that ad infinitum. I feel good with these concepts. Nothing is impossible but I can't see myself dropping these concepts in the near future.
The next concept is that in the beginning is the decision and the decision is to be. This brings into existence, the spirit. The best explanation seems to be that spirits splintered off from Cause. Once we have spirits, the next concept is that the first action of beingness is to extend from a beingness (spirit) points to view and thus there is space created, and thus a spirit is defined in part by his viewpoint.
Those of us who ran backtrack dianetics a lot ran supposed early track incidents where there was no time. All we did was postulate things to view, much like looking at colored patterns in a kaleidoscope. We'd form a picture, view it and it would vanish and we would form another picture, view it and it would vanish, etc., ad infinitum. Basically that is all we did. We did not have memories, Each Kaleidoscope picture occurred newly in its own unit of time and lasted only long enough for us to view it at which point it vanished. I came up with a name for the length of duration of a picture, I used a German word, augenblick, which means the blink of an eye. Augenblick read on the emeter and blink of the eye did not so my auditor went with augenblick.
Thus, things continued this way in a timeless manner with no passage of time actually taking place. I have no idea how many pictures I viewed but they seemed almost endless in number. The first change occurred when another spirit put up their picture in my space. To me that was Basic-Basic for the start of my time track. Prior to visualizing another person's picture, I was not creating a time track and after viewing it, I created a memory machine to remember my pictures for me, automatically. My reality from receiving auditing as well as auditing others was that pretty much everyone entering this universe shared a beginning similar to this.
I had an epiphany that the reason for recording everything was to be able to retrace my steps at some point further down the road so as to be able to return to my Native state, with no time or recording taking place, should I find it advantageous to do so. I took it for granted that all of us, at least here on Earth and in human bodies had shared similar experiences.
In conclusion, my point is that a universe without time is real to me, I know a lot about it, whether or not any of the above actually took place or not, I have reality that a no time universe is completely possible. It may be therapeutic and not lead to going crazy or having destructive goals but it gets boring after awhile. The advent of time passage leads to a game and more excitement but it does open the door for one to degrade himself or herself and go off pursuing some pretty insane games.
Lakey
Okay, Maria, thanks for the above paragraph in answer to what I asked for. The concept of thought experiments is real to me and I can work with that. The concept of traveling somewhere in a system with no time is more difficult to visualize. However, such things as time warps, etc. exist which shed a bit of reality on changing locations without any time passage occurring. Even in relativity theory, traveling at the velocity of light would yield precisely that result. However for a material object to travel at or above light speed is ruled out by the math on which relativity is based. Of course for a non material object, there is no law preventing such an object from exceeding light speed. Thus spirits can theoretically instantly transport to any location, since they have no matter in their composition.
I know that you are not coming at it from a physics point of view but from a Metaphysical point of view, but I see it better if I can see a physics based situation where some unusual thing might be possible. If I can get to that point, then I can cut loose from physics and attempt to look at it from other points of view. I'll kick this around some more and get back to you.
In models of the universe dreamed up by Hubbard, Vinair, Hinduism and other sources, There is a before the beginning period devoid of matter, light, time and such. All that exists in that period is potential cause. Vinnai came up with the concept that cause and effect are two sides of the same coin. This leads to Cause initiating action in itself. This is needed so as to get off of the treadmill where it is always asked what came before Cause, and what came before that ad infinitum. I feel good with these concepts. Nothing is impossible but I can't see myself dropping these concepts in the near future.
The next concept is that in the beginning is the decision and the decision is to be. This brings into existence, the spirit. The best explanation seems to be that spirits splintered off from Cause. Once we have spirits, the next concept is that the first action of beingness is to extend from a beingness (spirit) points to view and thus there is space created, and thus a spirit is defined in part by his viewpoint.
Those of us who ran backtrack dianetics a lot ran supposed early track incidents where there was no time. All we did was postulate things to view, much like looking at colored patterns in a kaleidoscope. We'd form a picture, view it and it would vanish and we would form another picture, view it and it would vanish, etc., ad infinitum. Basically that is all we did. We did not have memories, Each Kaleidoscope picture occurred newly in its own unit of time and lasted only long enough for us to view it at which point it vanished. I came up with a name for the length of duration of a picture, I used a German word, augenblick, which means the blink of an eye. Augenblick read on the emeter and blink of the eye did not so my auditor went with augenblick.
Thus, things continued this way in a timeless manner with no passage of time actually taking place. I have no idea how many pictures I viewed but they seemed almost endless in number. The first change occurred when another spirit put up their picture in my space. To me that was Basic-Basic for the start of my time track. Prior to visualizing another person's picture, I was not creating a time track and after viewing it, I created a memory machine to remember my pictures for me, automatically. My reality from receiving auditing as well as auditing others was that pretty much everyone entering this universe shared a beginning similar to this.
I had an epiphany that the reason for recording everything was to be able to retrace my steps at some point further down the road so as to be able to return to my Native state, with no time or recording taking place, should I find it advantageous to do so. I took it for granted that all of us, at least here on Earth and in human bodies had shared similar experiences.
In conclusion, my point is that a universe without time is real to me, I know a lot about it, whether or not any of the above actually took place or not, I have reality that a no time universe is completely possible. It may be therapeutic and not lead to going crazy or having destructive goals but it gets boring after awhile. The advent of time passage leads to a game and more excitement but it does open the door for one to degrade himself or herself and go off pursuing some pretty insane games.
Lakey
Last edited:
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
In response, l am not sure how a quantum view of timespace prevents a game or even motion and change, insofar as we define time as an abstraction in pyschological terms, one by which we can 'think' experience. Since we can think it we also 'assemble' an opinion about it which is time. It works whether it is an abstraction or not as far as games go. I would agree with minkowski, there is no time, only a dimension of timespace (concerning the distortion of space caused by gravity) which we interpret as before and after. Time comes to be our problem, insofar as Space is not flat as Euclid thought. Of course this question has its partisans. I am intrigued simply for the reason that it's interesting to ask if metaphysical space (assuming it exists) conforms to this sort of physics in which time is a dimension of space and to ask what such a model look like. Do heavenly worlds connect via a physics? If so does it bear degrees of resemblance or would it share conceptual basis with findings of our physics? For these questions, not answered, I do assume such metaphysical worlds exist.
Nietzsche said in his later notes man is a "being with the habit of dreaming according to some kind of rule - that is a living being." A philosopher is one who questions and tests the various rules; his job is not to enforce a specific answer. The low fruit ( Scn cosmology) seems to be this view of time as real which I question. Scn is not science or philosophy because it answers rather than questions.
Thank you for engaging in the thought. Philosophy as you probably know, is less concerned with measuring facts and more occupied in thinking itself. We study Nietzsche or Freud and discuss them not to agree or disagree, rather to think certain problems and questions; the requirement of a right answer is not the thing; the exercise in thinking and reading is what is of interest, to be able to follow a question through and examine the consequences of one view vs. another.
In response, l am not sure how a quantum view of timespace prevents a game or even motion and change, insofar as we define time as an abstraction in pyschological terms, one by which we can 'think' experience. Since we can think it we also 'assemble' an opinion about it which is time. It works whether it is an abstraction or not as far as games go. I would agree with minkowski, there is no time, only a dimension of timespace (concerning the distortion of space caused by gravity) which we interpret as before and after. Time comes to be our problem, insofar as Space is not flat as Euclid thought. Of course this question has its partisans. I am intrigued simply for the reason that it's interesting to ask if metaphysical space (assuming it exists) conforms to this sort of physics in which time is a dimension of space and to ask what such a model look like. Do heavenly worlds connect via a physics? If so does it bear degrees of resemblance or would it share conceptual basis with findings of our physics? For these questions, not answered, I do assume such metaphysical worlds exist.
Nietzsche said in his later notes man is a "being with the habit of dreaming according to some kind of rule - that is a living being." A philosopher is one who questions and tests the various rules; his job is not to enforce a specific answer. The low fruit ( Scn cosmology) seems to be this view of time as real which I question. Scn is not science or philosophy because it answers rather than questions.
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Maria, I really understand the points you are making. Math and physics tend to be results driven. Some math isn't but applied math and virtually all of physics is. Philosophy is more thought driven. I didn't really know that until just know so thanks for explaining that to me and others on ESMB! All the years I've been doing recreational puzzles I now wish I had spent studying psychology but I can't turn back the clock, or maybe no clock even exists as per our recent discussion.
I'm going to reread what you wrote and ponder it more. Maybe I'll write something more on this topic but probably not.
One thing is certain, with your background, I can see that nothing in scientology would align with your course of studies in life. Actually, I am very surprised that they were ever able to sign you up and even more surprised that for a short time you were a believer of sorts in auditing and C/Sing. I think that was one of Hubbard's secretes. He prayed upon the desire and willingness to help of kind hearted and intellectually bright people. Such people want to help and Hubbard promised them he would give them the tools to help. A lot of good people made the mistake of believing that Hubbard was a truthful and honest man and he took advantage of that, worked each and every one of these types of people to their breaking point and the unceremoniously dumped them back into society as broken human beings who now needed help themselves. Doing that was his real genius, and having done that to thousands is his legacy!
Maria, I really understand the points you are making. Math and physics tend to be results driven. Some math isn't but applied math and virtually all of physics is. Philosophy is more thought driven. I didn't really know that until just know so thanks for explaining that to me and others on ESMB! All the years I've been doing recreational puzzles I now wish I had spent studying psychology but I can't turn back the clock, or maybe no clock even exists as per our recent discussion.
I'm going to reread what you wrote and ponder it more. Maybe I'll write something more on this topic but probably not.
One thing is certain, with your background, I can see that nothing in scientology would align with your course of studies in life. Actually, I am very surprised that they were ever able to sign you up and even more surprised that for a short time you were a believer of sorts in auditing and C/Sing. I think that was one of Hubbard's secretes. He prayed upon the desire and willingness to help of kind hearted and intellectually bright people. Such people want to help and Hubbard promised them he would give them the tools to help. A lot of good people made the mistake of believing that Hubbard was a truthful and honest man and he took advantage of that, worked each and every one of these types of people to their breaking point and the unceremoniously dumped them back into society as broken human beings who now needed help themselves. Doing that was his real genius, and having done that to thousands is his legacy!
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Yes, I suddenly saw we had different approaches, that my motivation (questioning) is deconstructive and not result driven.
I was in Scientology before being trained this way, so I was as looped into wins and results as anyone else.
Yes, I suddenly saw we had different approaches, that my motivation (questioning) is deconstructive and not result driven.
I was in Scientology before being trained this way, so I was as looped into wins and results as anyone else.
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
I remember spending lots of time with the ashtray. I was a true believer and could withstand it hour after hour in a co-audit with a fellow auditor. Many publics can't. Maybe that is why WUS is spending all this time trying to prepare them in a recent Ortega video.
http://tonyortega.org/2015/04/28/se...lains-about-cheating-on-the-survival-rundown/
I guess just thinking of it is bank sinking for some.
I remember spending lots of time with the ashtray. I was a true believer and could withstand it hour after hour in a co-audit with a fellow auditor. Many publics can't. Maybe that is why WUS is spending all this time trying to prepare them in a recent Ortega video.
http://tonyortega.org/2015/04/28/se...lains-about-cheating-on-the-survival-rundown/
I guess just thinking of it is bank sinking for some.
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Lakey. For arguments sake although you are probably bored of the topic, from the perspective of 'experience' there is never a jarring discrepancy about time. One would have to be outside of space and able to take measurements from discrete frames of reference to notice the variance. As humans suffering from psychologies we have a consistent experience of time. I would argue - speculatively of course - that some persons might lack this 'consistency' for whatever reason and fall outside of the norm thus accounting for their claims of metaphysical distortions. In other words not as in the case of normal people who stay within ordinary range. I am rolling over laughing....thinking of the conformity of 'normal' but nonetheless.....
Lakey. For arguments sake although you are probably bored of the topic, from the perspective of 'experience' there is never a jarring discrepancy about time. One would have to be outside of space and able to take measurements from discrete frames of reference to notice the variance. As humans suffering from psychologies we have a consistent experience of time. I would argue - speculatively of course - that some persons might lack this 'consistency' for whatever reason and fall outside of the norm thus accounting for their claims of metaphysical distortions. In other words not as in the case of normal people who stay within ordinary range. I am rolling over laughing....thinking of the conformity of 'normal' but nonetheless.....
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
The ashtray does not feature in any auditing I know of. Only in TR-8, which is for auditor training.
The ashtray does not feature in any auditing I know of. Only in TR-8, which is for auditor training.
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Oh right. Forgive me. It has been 35 years and I hope I remember as little as possible.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
What do you mean by "bank sinking", I am not familiar with the term. For most of those still in CoS, the only sinking I can come up which has anything to do with their bank would relate to their "bank account". It's SOP for active Scientologists that their bank account balance is sinking in value, in fact often their bank account is overdrawn and racking up a lot of NSF (non sufficient fund) fees.
Lakey
What do you mean by "bank sinking", I am not familiar with the term. For most of those still in CoS, the only sinking I can come up which has anything to do with their bank would relate to their "bank account". It's SOP for active Scientologists that their bank account balance is sinking in value, in fact often their bank account is overdrawn and racking up a lot of NSF (non sufficient fund) fees.
Lakey
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
I have attempted to apply philosophy to the concept of time, as per your comment in italics, directly above. I have no credentials to do this since I am a complete neophyte in the subject but each person has to start somewhere. I am testing the various rules by examining various definitions of time. I have looked at standard dictionary definitions, Hubbard's definitions and Minkowski's ideas on the subject. I believe that Minkowski is correct, as far as he goes. I am choosing to apply Minkowski's ideas to the existing definitions which society and the subject of pre quantum physics had and improving those definitions of time, bringing them "more up to snuff". You, and perhaps Minkowski are using his ideas to suggest that there is no time.
The question then comes down to a matter of viewpoint. We have existing definitions of time and space from society, from men of science and from a man of pseudo science as espoused by the religion which he created. Now, as a result of relativity concepts, having to do with Einstein, Minkowski enters the scene and makes new observations about time. Using Minkowski, one has a choice, we can use his ideas to amend and update existing definitions about time or we can declare that there is no time, only the action of gravity acting on matter so as to curve spacetime. Why throw out the baby with the bathwater? Why not just update what we have already been working with for thousands of years?
Of course, both viewpoints can be used and further studies can be based on both points of view. For me, as a pragmatist, I prefer to update what we already have. The day we are able to throw our calendars and our clocks away and still have a functional society will be the day where I agree fully to the concept of no time. I can agree to a temporary moratorium where it is agreed to jettison the concept of time, temporarily, for the sake of making some experimental observations to see what kind of universe might exist if the prevailing agreement and consensus was that there was 'no time'. That would be instructive and might even be fun to contemplate but right now, that is about as far as I am able to go in accepting a "no time" universe.
Lakey
UPDATE TO POST: A friend suggested by PM that I point out that Minkowski was once a teacher of Einstein. My earlier reference source merely said that Hermann Minkowski, a Polish mathematician, gave relativity theory its elegant interpretation in terms of a four-dimensional spacetime. Many of the ideas in this chapter (of my reference book) are as much Minkowdki's as they are Einstein's. Here is a link to the Wikepedia article on Minkowski: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=890767184320342&set=pcb.890767380986989&type=1&theater.
By the way, Minkowski studied at the University of Konigsburg. Konigsburg was the capital on the German state of Prussia at the very Easternmost reaches of the German Reich. Germany lost all of that area in the closing battles of WWII. The USSR annexed the area and Prussia disappeared from the map. Currently, Konigsburg is in Russia and has been renamed Kalingrad. The university is gone and Kalingrad is now home to a Russian naval base. When the Baltic states dropped out of the USSR around 1992, Kalingrad became separated from the main body of Russia so it is now a detached piece of Russia not connected to the main part of the country. It gives Russia a warm water port on the Baltic.
Some very notable people were alumni of the University of Konigsburg, including Emmanuel Kant.
I have attempted to apply philosophy to the concept of time, as per your comment in italics, directly above. I have no credentials to do this since I am a complete neophyte in the subject but each person has to start somewhere. I am testing the various rules by examining various definitions of time. I have looked at standard dictionary definitions, Hubbard's definitions and Minkowski's ideas on the subject. I believe that Minkowski is correct, as far as he goes. I am choosing to apply Minkowski's ideas to the existing definitions which society and the subject of pre quantum physics had and improving those definitions of time, bringing them "more up to snuff". You, and perhaps Minkowski are using his ideas to suggest that there is no time.
The question then comes down to a matter of viewpoint. We have existing definitions of time and space from society, from men of science and from a man of pseudo science as espoused by the religion which he created. Now, as a result of relativity concepts, having to do with Einstein, Minkowski enters the scene and makes new observations about time. Using Minkowski, one has a choice, we can use his ideas to amend and update existing definitions about time or we can declare that there is no time, only the action of gravity acting on matter so as to curve spacetime. Why throw out the baby with the bathwater? Why not just update what we have already been working with for thousands of years?
Of course, both viewpoints can be used and further studies can be based on both points of view. For me, as a pragmatist, I prefer to update what we already have. The day we are able to throw our calendars and our clocks away and still have a functional society will be the day where I agree fully to the concept of no time. I can agree to a temporary moratorium where it is agreed to jettison the concept of time, temporarily, for the sake of making some experimental observations to see what kind of universe might exist if the prevailing agreement and consensus was that there was 'no time'. That would be instructive and might even be fun to contemplate but right now, that is about as far as I am able to go in accepting a "no time" universe.
Lakey
UPDATE TO POST: A friend suggested by PM that I point out that Minkowski was once a teacher of Einstein. My earlier reference source merely said that Hermann Minkowski, a Polish mathematician, gave relativity theory its elegant interpretation in terms of a four-dimensional spacetime. Many of the ideas in this chapter (of my reference book) are as much Minkowdki's as they are Einstein's. Here is a link to the Wikepedia article on Minkowski: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=890767184320342&set=pcb.890767380986989&type=1&theater.
By the way, Minkowski studied at the University of Konigsburg. Konigsburg was the capital on the German state of Prussia at the very Easternmost reaches of the German Reich. Germany lost all of that area in the closing battles of WWII. The USSR annexed the area and Prussia disappeared from the map. Currently, Konigsburg is in Russia and has been renamed Kalingrad. The university is gone and Kalingrad is now home to a Russian naval base. When the Baltic states dropped out of the USSR around 1992, Kalingrad became separated from the main body of Russia so it is now a detached piece of Russia not connected to the main part of the country. It gives Russia a warm water port on the Baltic.
Some very notable people were alumni of the University of Konigsburg, including Emmanuel Kant.
Last edited:
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
I got home from the grocery and just found this on the back of my Cheerios. I swear John Raff is up to his old tricks.
I'm remembering his story of Betsy the bullet nosed Studebaker that apparently went through a warp.http://community.freezone-tech.info/john-rafanello/author/john-rafanello/
I got home from the grocery and just found this on the back of my Cheerios. I swear John Raff is up to his old tricks.
I'm remembering his story of Betsy the bullet nosed Studebaker that apparently went through a warp.http://community.freezone-tech.info/john-rafanello/author/john-rafanello/
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Somehow, I got the impression that his Studebaker was not the bullet nosed type but the model just preceding that, a 47, 48 or 49 Studebaker. The bullet nosed model was built only in 1950 and 1951. The 1950 Studebaker sold in record numbers, about 320,000 for the year, the most Studebaker or any independent auto maker had ever sold in 1 year up to that point.
Check out these Studebakers from 1948: https://www.google.com/search?q=194...icanclassic.com%2F1948Studebaker.html;800;600
By contrast, check out the bullet nosed model of 195 https://www.google.com/search?q=195...udebaker%2F1950%2520Studebaker.html;1037;7220
The bullet nosed model really turned some heads. What a unique car, ultra futuristic for it's time! Even so, the bullet nose never caught on as a fad, the way tailfins did in the late 50's. Studebaker, broke the mold for the 1953 model year with their revolutionary styling done by Bob Bourke of the Raymond Lowey Studios. This was considered European styling at the time. The styling was ultra clean and virtually perfect with every line and curve in exactly the right place. Many people consider the 1953 Studebaker Starline Coupe to be the most beautiful passenger car, sold at a budget price, ever produced in the USA:
https://www.google.com/search?q=195...escaped_fragment_%25253Dv%25253Dslideshow%252
Studebaker was on a roll styling wise. Even with superb styling and being well built and reliable, the marque nearly went out of business in 1958. The 1959 Lark model was a big success and saved their bacon but only for about 5 years. In 1964 production ceased in the USA and in 1966 the last models of the marque rolled of the Hamilton, Ontario assembly line in Canada. After that, the Studebaker name plate passed into the history books, as far as production goes, The marque, started in the mid 19th century as a coach builder for horse drawn vehicles. They also had an early electric model in the first 10 years of the 20th century.
Lakey
I got home from the grocery and just found this on the back of my Cheerios. I swear John Raff is up to his old tricks.
I'm remembering his story of Betsy the bullet nosed Studebaker that apparently went through a warp.http://community.freezone-tech.info/john-rafanello/author/john-rafanello/
Somehow, I got the impression that his Studebaker was not the bullet nosed type but the model just preceding that, a 47, 48 or 49 Studebaker. The bullet nosed model was built only in 1950 and 1951. The 1950 Studebaker sold in record numbers, about 320,000 for the year, the most Studebaker or any independent auto maker had ever sold in 1 year up to that point.
Check out these Studebakers from 1948: https://www.google.com/search?q=194...icanclassic.com%2F1948Studebaker.html;800;600
By contrast, check out the bullet nosed model of 195 https://www.google.com/search?q=195...udebaker%2F1950%2520Studebaker.html;1037;7220
The bullet nosed model really turned some heads. What a unique car, ultra futuristic for it's time! Even so, the bullet nose never caught on as a fad, the way tailfins did in the late 50's. Studebaker, broke the mold for the 1953 model year with their revolutionary styling done by Bob Bourke of the Raymond Lowey Studios. This was considered European styling at the time. The styling was ultra clean and virtually perfect with every line and curve in exactly the right place. Many people consider the 1953 Studebaker Starline Coupe to be the most beautiful passenger car, sold at a budget price, ever produced in the USA:
https://www.google.com/search?q=195...escaped_fragment_%25253Dv%25253Dslideshow%252
Studebaker was on a roll styling wise. Even with superb styling and being well built and reliable, the marque nearly went out of business in 1958. The 1959 Lark model was a big success and saved their bacon but only for about 5 years. In 1964 production ceased in the USA and in 1966 the last models of the marque rolled of the Hamilton, Ontario assembly line in Canada. After that, the Studebaker name plate passed into the history books, as far as production goes, The marque, started in the mid 19th century as a coach builder for horse drawn vehicles. They also had an early electric model in the first 10 years of the 20th century.
Lakey
Last edited:
Helena Handbasket
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
One is the idea of before and after. This is universal and inescapable; with knowledge of two events one can always say which came before and which came after.
The other is the idea of how much time from one event to another. This requires the concept of how fast time flows. I believe there are particles that "count cadence" and therefore establish the flow rate of time.
I also believe that time travel (like going into the past) is not possible, although there are several phenomena that make it seem that it is possible.
Helena
I believe in two concepts of time.
One is the idea of before and after. This is universal and inescapable; with knowledge of two events one can always say which came before and which came after.
The other is the idea of how much time from one event to another. This requires the concept of how fast time flows. I believe there are particles that "count cadence" and therefore establish the flow rate of time.
I also believe that time travel (like going into the past) is not possible, although there are several phenomena that make it seem that it is possible.
Helena
Little David
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
One of the Studebaker brothers made wheelbarrows in Placerville California during the gold rush.
https://www.edcgov.us/Living/Stories/Wheelbarrow_Johnny.aspx
One of the Studebaker brothers made wheelbarrows in Placerville California during the gold rush.
https://www.edcgov.us/Living/Stories/Wheelbarrow_Johnny.aspx
Attachments
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Placerville was Hangtown then. The people who did well were the equipment suppliers. I've panned for gold near there. Wheelbarrows can move a lot of material to a sluice.
One of the Studebaker brothers made wheelbarrows in Placerville California during the gold rush.
https://www.edcgov.us/Living/Stories/Wheelbarrow_Johnny.aspx
Placerville was Hangtown then. The people who did well were the equipment suppliers. I've panned for gold near there. Wheelbarrows can move a lot of material to a sluice.
Maria Cuervo
Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
They say one could keep time according to Kant's schedule.
Of course it will not happen; the clocks are right here.
They say one could keep time according to Kant's schedule.
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
I liked the Starline convertible. That wheelbarrow is a convertible too! Very handy.
I liked the Starline convertible. That wheelbarrow is a convertible too! Very handy.
- Status