Dean,
These types of references from Etidorhpa, to me, indicate that this was not
written from an entirely fictional approach. Why would the author delve into
such a concept, and then support it with this type of philosophizing, if
there were not an information base from which to draw this reasoning?
Because to be consistent throughout the book, even though many different
aspects of accepted scientific theory are refuted, and to be able to present
such a novel view while doing so, is far beyond random creative writing
genius, but has to be based on an extended study of a theoretical discipline.
How many accepted scientific theories does Etidorhpa take on anyway, several
dozen? And each one is explained by a completely contradictory concept to
that which the science of the day supported. And yet, these explanations,
even though sometimes very bizarre, don't seem to contradict each other in
the process.
Is this a hidden philosophy, a secret Rosecrucian tennant of belief, a
protected belief system of a secret society? Hmmm . . . one wonders as to
the source of these many unique concepts.
But, let's call it fiction, and then we won't have to answer all those
penetrating questions, okay? He made it all up . . . right . . . that's the
ticket . . . he was just kidding . . . it isn't really real . . . hmmm.
Norlan