You more than likely think you know what an atom is, but do you?

[Robert W]

This video might perplex you, and it should. We are not experts on what Atoms are. We have seen our books, heard teachers talk, but do you really think you know what atoms are? Be ready to learn. To think. To imagine. So, when others tell you they know what atoms are, tell them what you learned today. This journey will dazzle you. I promise.

 

[toobfreak]

This video might perplex you, and it should. We are not experts on what Atoms are. We have seen our books, heard teachers talk, but do you really think you know what atoms are? Be ready to learn. To think. To imagine. So, when others tell you they know what atoms are, tell them what you learned today. This journey will dazzle you. I promise.

Pretty good vid. A little simplistic, but one of the better short subject laymen descriptions I've seen. RF was great. He covers a lot. It prompts me to want to maybe discuss it a bit farther if you wish, as time allows.

Perhaps a couple things I might flesh out here is what a quantum particle actually is: Quanta is a packet, a "quantity" of probability localized to some state, position or energy, like a measuring cup. Ultimately quanta are really just packets of discreet energy levels bound to discreet locations in time and space. Put another way, quanta, the mathematical building block of matter, is just a packet of quantized energy, so it all really comes down to energy. Matter is really just a quantized state of energy fields.

Quarks come in 3 generations of charge or state (there being 2 states per generation), influenced by a force carrier to organize themselves into composite groups of charge called hadrons. This is balanced by oppositely charged leptons also in three generations, the electron being the 1st, collectively known as fermions (think of 'firmament'), where the two charges cancel out giving the hadron a net zero charge (neutral). This is why there is always an equal number of protons (+) and electrons (-).

He mentions the Pauli Principle of exclusion, this defines quantized energy states where an electron must exist in one or the other state jumping between shells with no known time nor energy dissipated between states; I'm convinced that central to this is the key to how a space ship or UFO could travel vast distances, move without inertia, and jump from location to location with no apparent time in between, not surprisingly, behavior described by many UFO witnesses.

What is most interesting is the number of times Feynman admits that we know WHAT happens, we can test and prove it, but we just don't know why. I believe this is the area where God comes in and if man ever succeeds in penetrating the answers to these questions, will be looking at the "mind of God," creation itself.

Its all a little daunting and confusing, but I hope this made a little sense.

BTW, it is the breaking of the Strong Force in an atom which is the source of energy release in an atom bomb.

 

[sparky]

the mind of God?

~S~

 

[DennisPTate]

This video might perplex you, and it should. We are not experts on what Atoms are. We have seen our books, heard teachers talk, but do you really think you know what atoms are? Be ready to learn. To think. To imagine. So, when others tell you they know what atoms are, tell them what you learned today. This journey will dazzle you. I promise.

I shall have to remember this discussion. I should listen to this.

In a way an atom is electromagnetism, gravity, weak and strong nuclear force all put together in a shockingly complex manner.

"It was not until 1920 that the idea of linking electromagnetism and
gravity resurfaced. At that time a new theory of gravitation had been proposed by Albert Einstein (1879-1955), called the general theory of relativity. It was a replacement of Newton's theory, which had stood unchallenged since 1687. Inspired by Einstein's work, a young German mathematician named Theodore Kaluza was seized by a curious idea. The theory of relativity links space an time together to form a four-dimensional space-time continuum. What would happen, mused Kaluza, if general relativity were formulated in five rather than four dimensions? This is what Kaluza did, and to everyone's astonishment it was discovered that five-dimensional gravity obeys the same laws as
four-dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell's laws for the electromagnetic field. In other words, gravitation and electromagnetism are automatically unified in five dimensions, where electromagnetism is merely a component of gravity!"

The only drawback of the theory concerns the extra dimension. Why
don't we see it? An ingenious answer was provided by Oskar Klein. A
hosepipe viewed from afar looks like a wiggly line, i.e. one- dimensional.
However, on closer inspection it can be seen as a narrow tube. It is, in fact,
two-dimensional, and what was taken to be a point on the line is actually a
little circle going around the tube. In the same way, reasoned Klein, what we normally regard as a point in three dimensional space could in reality be a little circle going around a fourth space dimension. Thus Kaluza's extra
dimension might well exist, but be impossible to detect because it is closed
(circular) and rolled up to a very small circumference. In spite of
these bizarre overtones, it seems probable that in future a "theory of everything" will make use of the idea of unseen higher dimensions."
....

"Although nature manifests four distinct forces, physicists believe that
each may be part of a smaller number of more primitive forces. At high energy, the electromagnetic and weak forces appear to merge into a single "electroweak" force. Some "grand unified theories" suggest that a further amalgamation takes place between the electroweak and strong forces at as yet unattained energies. The most ambitious unification schemes envisage an amalgamation of all four forces into a single "superforce" at ultra-high levels of energy."

...

"The real burden in the next three centuries will not be the development of fancy mathematics, but the experimental testing of these ambitious theories. All current thinking about total unification assumes that the effects of linking all the forces and particles together will only become manifest at energies that are some trillion times greater than those currently attainable in particle accelerators. Probably we shall never reach such energies directly" ( A Theory of Everything" Volume 21 of "The World of Science)

 

[Robert W]

Pretty good vid. A little simplistic, but one of the better short subject laymen descriptions I've seen. RF was great. He covers a lot. It prompts me to want to maybe discuss it a bit farther if you wish, as time allows.

Perhaps a couple things I might flesh out here is what a quantum particle actually is: Quanta is a packet, a "quantity" of probability localized to some state, position or energy, like a measuring cup. Ultimately quanta are really just packets of discreet energy levels bound to discreet locations in time and space. Put another way, quanta, the mathematical building block of matter, is just a packet of quantized energy, so it all really comes down to energy. Matter is really just a quantized state of energy fields.

Quarks come in 3 generations of charge or state (there being 2 states per generation), influenced by a force carrier to organize themselves into composite groups of charge called hadrons. This is balanced by oppositely charged leptons also in three generations, the electron being the 1st, collectively known as fermions (think of 'firmament'), where the two charges cancel out giving the hadron a net zero charge (neutral). This is why there is always an equal number of protons (+) and electrons (-).

He mentions the Pauli Principle of exclusion, this defines quantized energy states where an electron must exist in one or the other state jumping between shells with no known time nor energy dissipated between states; I'm convinced that central to this is the key to how a space ship or UFO could travel vast distances, move without inertia, and jump from location to location with no apparent time in between, not surprisingly, behavior described by many UFO witnesses.

What is most interesting is the number of times Feynman admits that we know WHAT happens, we can test and prove it, but we just don't know why. I believe this is the area where God comes in and if man ever succeeds in penetrating the answers to these questions, will be looking at the "mind of God," creation itself.

Its all a little daunting and confusing, but I hope this made a little sense.

BTW, it is the breaking of the Strong Force in an atom which is the source of energy release in an atom bomb.

When I was in the 8th grade, travel through space superfast was a thing I worked on. We are talking about 75 years ago so then knowledge on this was pretty primitive. I got the idea if you moved fast enough, space would form a curve in front that suddenly you would pop trough instantly. Of course, then my math skills were also primitive, so the idea faded. Hot rods and girls of course moved me their way.

 

[toobfreak]

In a way an atom is electromagnetism, gravity, weak and strong nuclear force all put together in a shockingly complex manner.

Gravity plays no part in the existence of an atom. The various forces within the atom (the four bosonic forces) completely swamp out any gravitational attraction between the atomic particles.

Take the Earth for example: gravity is a function of the mass of the Earth, yet a simple magnet the size of a dime can overcome the gravity of the entire Earth to attract or repel another object despite all of Earth's gravity.

That is one of physics biggest problems: gravity is a function of the macro universe, quanta a function of the micro universe, and no sure way of marrying the two. So far, String Theory (or one of its variants) has been the most successful attempts.

And about that shocking complexity, there again is the other problem--- the function of an atom must be simplicity itself, yet we cannot see it, so it only becomes shockingly complex to us. Think about it: all of this atomic structure which predicates the fundamental nature of the hadronic universe (all observable matter from hydrogen gas to the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, people and conscious, was all laid down, engineered and put together 14 billion years ago all by itself, no laboratories nor scientists, just as an apparent /natural consequence/ of existence.

And the kicker: the matter we know and see actually only makes up a tiny fraction of the ACTUAL universe. Something like 75% of all that is out there is completely invisible to us. But we have begun to crack the surface: here is an early map of one of the first successful attempts to map dark matter surrounding a distant galaxy cluster:

I don't know the particulars of how they imaged this, but apparently they used the Chandra X Ray telescope along with the HST to create the image. This dark matter literally drives the formation and gathering of all these galaxies not the galaxies themselves.

 

[toobfreak]

When I was in the 8th grade, travel through space superfast was a thing I worked on. We are talking about 75 years ago so then knowledge on this was pretty primitive. I got the idea if you moved fast enough, space would form a curve in front that suddenly you would pop trough instantly. Of course, then my math skills were also primitive, so the idea faded. Hot rods and girls of course moved me their way.

That's not an entirely bad or unworkable idea! Pretty impressive at a time when the jet engine and early rockets were still under development.

I remember buying books back in the 70's about stuff like black holes. Back then, these things were entirely theoretical akin to UFOs and sci-fi, not taken as serious subjects by credible scientists anymore than Bigfoot, now our physics depends on these things.

To put an edge on your theory, I would only add that with speed comes mass (as an object approaches c, it attains infinite mass thus preventing matter from ever attaining c much less go belong it. But instead of speed, substitute gravity, and now your idea has some legs, after all, the trick to going very far in space is not to go very fast like a bullet in newtonian geometry, but to simply fold space bringing your destination close to you since space itself is really a function of TIME.

Which always brings me back to the old axiom that consciousness determines reality. No mind, no matter; no matter, never mind.

 

[Robert W]

That's not an entirely bad or unworkable idea! Pretty impressive at a time when the jet engine and early rockets were still under development.

I remember buying books back in the 70's about stuff like black holes. Back then, these things were entirely theoretical akin to UFOs and sci-fi, not taken as serious subjects by credible scientists anymore than Bigfoot, now our physics depends on these things.

To put an edge on your theory, I would only add that with speed comes mass (as an object approaches c, it attains infinite mass thus preventing matter from ever attaining c much less go belong it. But instead of speed, substitute gravity, and now your idea has some legs, after all, the trick to going very far in space is not to go very fast like a bullet in newtonian geometry, but to simply fold space bringing your destination close to you since space itself is really a function of TIME.

Which always brings me back to the old axiom that consciousness determines reality. No mind, no matter; no matter, never mind.

You understood my boyhood idea perfectly. I really was not saying the rocket would go a lot faster, though fast enough to fold space, but not at close to the speed of light. Space in my idea got folded up as you described.

 

[toobfreak]

You understood my boyhood idea perfectly. I really was not saying the rocket would go a lot faster, though fast enough to fold space, but not at close to the speed of light. Space in my idea got folded up as you described.

I was just trying to find a decent video or gif illustrating what an electron does when it changes states (jumps to a higher shell), but do you think anyone makes one? Maybe tomorrow I'll try to draw one myself.

When I was a kid, I tried to design a ship for traveling among the stars, but again, speed is not the answer. Going faster to get there sooner is not the solution. Even if we could approach light speed, it would take 6 years to get to even the nearest star. Einstein touched upon it, space is a function of gravity and gravity curves space.

If we are ever to really get around the universe, it won't be in rockets or anything which requires hairpin calculations of time and trajectory with no fuel to spare for side ventures or to correct steering mistakes, it will be by creating a quantum singularity whereby the universe is brought down within the ship and we pop out of existence in one area of space then reappear at our destination in almost no time.

I'll be frank is repeating again that I know it can be done, because I've seen it done. You can't fly through space if you are still subject to inertial mass (g-force) throwing the astronauts against the walls of the ship splattering them like paint.

 

[sparky]

Which always brings me back to the old axiom that consciousness determines reality. No mind, no matter; no matter, never mind

the Law of Projected Consciousness........

whooo boy...... ~S~

 

[sparky]

so.....if i don't mind , it doesn't matter......??? ~S~

 

[toobfreak]

so.....if i don't mind , it doesn't matter......??? ~S~

It sort of comes back to the tree in the woods thing. If there were no mind in the universe to know it, would there be any matter? What role does consciousness (mind) play in the existence of the universe? If there is intelligent purpose at play here, then all of our physical theories completely lack any mathematical representation of it in our theories, and perhaps that is why all of them fail in every attempt at grand unification.

 

[sparky]

It sort of comes back to the tree in the woods thing. If there were no mind in the universe to know it, would there be any matter? What role does consciousness (mind) play in the existence of the universe? If there is intelligent purpose at play here, then all of our physical theories completely lack any mathematical representation of it in our theories, and perhaps that is why all of them fail in every attempt at grand unification.

well ....believe it or not i've read a lot on this Toob.....i often stay up late nights reading on such things, they really do pose a challenge to my puny 'pig farmer' brain....which is good for me (et all).......

but let's consider the implications.......time....space.....light......consciousness.....dark matter......all have a working interconvertibility we (as a race) have not quite yet been able to conceive , because we are constrained to what we know as the 'physical universe'

IT's heavy Toob......it challenges all the rules we've established.....empirical science will have kittens.....and you kind sir, are the reason i'm needing more whiskey right now......


~S~

 

[toobfreak]

well ....believe it or not i've read a lot on this Toob.....i often stay up late nights reading on such things, they really do pose a challenge to my puny 'pig farmer' brain....which is good for me (et all).......

Interestingly, while I've studied quantum theory since the 1980s, I had never heard these quotes from Planck. Max absolutely nails it.

but let's consider the implications.......time....space.....light......consciousness.....dark matter......all have a working interconvertibility we (as a race) have not quite yet been able to conceive , because we are constrained to what we know as the 'physical universe'
IT's heavy Toob......it challenges all the rules we've established.....empirical science will have kittens.....and you kind sir, are the reason i'm needing more whiskey right now......

Ironically, they kind of tried to touch upon this in the first season of ST:TNG. In one episode, they had Wesley Crusher meet up with a "traveler" who took them across the universe while telling Wesley that time, space and consciousness were all just different aspects of the same thing.

You've touched upon why in the 1970s, I began exploring eastern philosophy, specifically Vedic Science (the precursor to Hinduism). Vedic Science was the first, original religion, originally passed down word of mouth, then allegedly, 5,000 years ago, man became too forgetful to remember it all so they began putting it all down in written form (Sanskrit).

Later, the original Sanskrit was translated to two other languages before finally being translated to English. The Vedas comprises a zillion volumes, just one of those works alone, the Srimad Bhagavatam comes in 18 volumes each a full sized hardback book. A lot of it deals with the lives and actions of specific people and may be hard to relate to or stay interested in, but parts of the Bhagavatam delve into the nature of the universe, it describes the atom, how to calculate the ages of the universe, how various musical notes relate to vibrational nodes along the spine opening up planes of consciousness, multiple universes, and much more.

I bought my first volume circa 1973 and it totally blew my mind that these people were discussing what essentially became the science of physics 5000 years later including stuff like this only now being rediscovered and imagined in the 20th century.

The Vedics imagined the universe much like a department store with a store owner (Krsna) on the top floor, with each department of the store handled by a different manager, a deity which was both part and parcel to the Supreme. The Vedas are replete with many deities, each in charge of one aspect of the universe, but they are all God. They are not many Gods but all part of one God, hard for modern man to grasp.

The universe basically broke down into THREE major deities, one for its creation (Brahma), one for its maintenance (Visnu) and a third for it dissolution (Shiva). They recognized that the universe oscillated, was born, grew, then dissolved back to be recreated all over again, and that there were innumerable universes being created, all floating on a Causal Ocean.

Quite a different world view from the Bible. Whether one agrees with, understands, or believes it all, it still makes for fascinating reading. Here is a chart I have showing a map of Brahma and how the various aspects of consciousness and being flowed from His body. The second chart below is an illustration of the construction of the universe including its many layers, some of these layers extend into other dimensions, some relate to Heaven, the abode of God (the Vaikuntha Worlds like Visnuloka), some of which we might understand today as existing in what we now call Dark Matter.

Mind you, this is what the Vedic clerics were studying and teaching thousands of years before the Bible was ever written.

My apologies if I'm getting too deep into this stuff, there is an awful lot of misinformation out there, and the files attached above are simply too large to be legible and readable in the file size restrictions of this site. I'll simply leave you with the knowledge that I have experimentally tested, verified and proven the veracity of many of their claims about mind, music, consciousness and being.

Now back to the mundane and prosaic...


.

 

[sparky]

My apologies if I'm getting too deep into this stuff

quite the contrary Mr Toob......and quite frankly those that can't realize their own conceptualization of reality is nothing more than that which they are capable of conceding to for their own comfort level is all their bad, not yours , mine, or anyone else that would delve into such a lofty abyss .... do rock on sir.~S~

 

[toobfreak]

quite the contrary Mr Toob......and quite frankly those that can't realize their own conceptualization of reality is nothing more than that which they are capable of conceding to for their own comfort level is all their bad, not yours , mine, or anyone else that would delve into such a lofty abyss .... do rock on sir.~S~

Frankly, Spark, I began life as an atheist, a scientist. I was studying physics and quantum theory growing up in a Christian environment (I used to memorize and recite all the books of the Bible as a kid), when my eyes opened up.

Simultaneously, oddly enough, I was approached by a priest of sorts in a parking lot one day, he just kind of appeared from somewhere, came up to me and introduced me to Vedic Science.

The one thing that biblical studies always turned me off on, besides various contradictions, vagarities, and gaping holes, was the predilection of always maintaining that for the Bible to be true, that all other religions then MUST be false--- mutually exclusive. Somehow, if other people in other times had other views, they were somehow a threat to biblical claims rather than both being able to coexist inclusively, and that just didn't make sense.

And to this day, while you don't see other religions caring one watt whether you agree or not, only Christianity and Islam are virulently opposed to all other views, even to the point of going to war and killing over it. They almost put Galileo to death just for suggesting the earth-centered view of Ptolemy might not be correct--- while even offering OBSERVATIONAL PROOF to support his claims!

There used to be a library in Alexandria which in its day was the greatest library on Earth with the greatest collection of scrolls of knowledge on the planet full of incalculable knowledge, free to everyone.

One day, a group feeling threatened by this freedom of knowledge went in there and destroyed the library and ripped the flesh off the bones of the administrator with sea shells. Even today, we can only guess at what some of the lost knowledge was, there being no other copies of it anywhere. All destroyed out of fear and intolerance.

Do you know that most of the works of Shakespeare were destroyed? Those few shakespearian plays we have today is all that survived from a far larger volume of work.

In the 1970s, I began looking closer at some of these older eastern religions for answers to questions I had not satisfied nor sufficiently explained in the Bible and to compare the various views of different trains of thought and in short order realized that in the Vedas they were describing and predicting many of the very same things now being addressed in Quantum physics, just from a different perspective using deities and such instead of just pure symbolic mathematics.

I liked the idea that while the Bible is rather vague about many things always subject to interpretation, everything in the Vedas was laid out in detail, very specifically, precisely and exactly, it all fit together, no contradictions, and that some of it even supported and predicted the biblical views of thousands of years later, and to this day, while you might meet a Hindu who does not give a rats ass whether you believe Hinduism or not, so many Christians are absolutely afraid of if not outrightly intolerant of any view, thought, suggestion or idea that is not 100% biblical.

Unlike the Bible, the Vedas are completely jiggy with all of the precepts of modern theoretical physics. One volume of the Bhagavatam even describes the atom, the creation of time, and the layers and ages of the universe. Vedic thought is very much allied with the ideas put forth in that video on Max Planck. Consciousness/mind is what matters and all of reality flows out from that.

 

[sparky]

Frankly, Spark, I began life as an atheist, a scientist. I was studying physics and quantum theory growing up in a Christian environment (I used to memorize and recite all the books of the Bible as a kid), when my eyes opened up.

Simultaneously, oddly enough, I was approached by a priest of sorts in a parking lot one day, he just kind of appeared from somewhere, came up to me and introduced me to Vedic Science.

The one thing that biblical studies always turned me off on, besides various contradictions, vagarities, and gaping holes, was the predilection of always maintaining that for the Bible to be true, that all other religions then MUST be false--- mutually exclusive. Somehow, if other people in other times had other views, they were somehow a threat to biblical claims rather than both being able to coexist inclusively, and that just didn't make sense.

And to this day, while you don't see other religions caring one watt whether you agree or not, only Christianity and Islam are virulently opposed to all other views, even to the point of going to war and killing over it. They almost put Galileo to death just for suggesting the earth-centered view of Ptolemy might not be correct--- while even offering OBSERVATIONAL PROOF to support his claims!

There used to be a library in Alexandria which in its day was the greatest library on Earth with the greatest collection of scrolls of knowledge on the planet full of incalculable knowledge, free to everyone.

One day, a group feeling threatened by this freedom of knowledge went in there and destroyed the library and ripped the flesh off the bones of the administrator with sea shells. Even today, we can only guess at what some of the lost knowledge was, there being no other copies of it anywhere. All destroyed out of fear and intolerance.

Do you know that most of the works of Shakespeare were destroyed? Those few shakespearian plays we have today is all that survived from a far larger volume of work.

In the 1970s, I began looking closer at some of these older eastern religions for answers to questions I had not satisfied nor sufficiently explained in the Bible and to compare the various views of different trains of thought and in short order realized that in the Vedas they were describing and predicting many of the very same things now being addressed in Quantum physics, just from a different perspective using deities and such instead of just pure symbolic mathematics.

I liked the idea that while the Bible is rather vague about many things always subject to interpretation, everything in the Vedas was laid out in detail, very specifically, precisely and exactly, it all fit together, no contradictions, and that some of it even supported and predicted the biblical views of thousands of years later, and to this day, while you might meet a Hindu who does not give a rats ass whether you believe Hinduism or not, so many Christians are absolutely afraid of if not outrightly intolerant of any view, thought, suggestion or idea that is not 100% biblical.

Unlike the Bible, the Vedas are completely jiggy with all of the precepts of modern theoretical physics. One volume of the Bhagavatam even describes the atom, the creation of time, and the layers and ages of the universe. Vedic thought is very much allied with the ideas put forth in that video on Max Planck. Consciousness/mind is what matters and all of reality flows out from that.

well i'm on board Mr Toob......i may not be any great shakes, but i know when i'm being coerced.

I'll start by admitting being raised roman catholic .......if you want to delve into being subjective as a youth start there......1/2 century later there's not much separating it from the Hitler youth shirts my pop brought home in 45'46....

mind rape is old news .........introspect is verboten , because it flies it's face, it was and always will be who gets a leg up.......most popular these days......so.....

those of us that think out of the 'box' are a threat......plz don't take that unkindly Mr Toob...... ~S~

 

[Lockback]

This video might perplex you, and it should. We are not experts on what Atoms are. We have seen our books, heard teachers talk, but do you really think you know what atoms are? Be ready to learn. To think. To imagine. So, when others tell you they know what atoms are, tell them what you learned today. This journey will dazzle you. I promise.

Thanks for the link!
I'll check it out on my TV during the Snow Storm From Hell tomorrow.

I do think I have a pretty good idea about the size of an atom: it matches the size of the brains of the leftists here.

 

[toobfreak]

I'll start by admitting being raised roman catholic .......

I grew up the only Protestant family surrounded by Catholics. Catholics seem more militant about religion than others. Me, I like seeing how various cultures addressed the idea of God. I'm pretty good with most all religions, except probably Islam.

God is like a skyscraper which appears different depending on which side and position you view it from. The important point is to recognize there is a God. Actually, there is a surprising commonality to many religions in their basic concepts.

It was the Catholic church which burned Giordano Bruno at the stake alive for his heresy of refusing to recant his notion that Earth could not be the center of the universe. This had a chilling effect on science for the next 200 years...

Giordano Bruno - Philosopher, Martyr, Inquisition | Britannica

Giordano Bruno - Philosopher, Martyr, Inquisition: In August 1591, at the invitation of the Venetian patrician Giovanni Mocenigo, Bruno made the fatal move of returning to Italy. At the time, such a move did not seem to be too much of a risk: Venice was by far the most liberal of the Italian...

www.britannica.com

 

[sparky]

I grew up the only Protestant family surrounded by Catholics. Catholics seem more militant about religion than others. Me, I like seeing how various cultures addressed the idea of God. I'm pretty good with most all religions, except probably Islam.

God is like a skyscraper which appears different depending on which side and position you view it from. The important point is to recognize there is a God. Actually, there is a surprising commonality to many religions in their basic concepts.

It was the Catholic church which burned Giordano Bruno at the stake alive for his heresy of refusing to recant his notion that Earth could not be the center of the universe. This had a chilling effect on science for the next 200 years...

Giordano Bruno - Philosopher, Martyr, Inquisition | Britannica

Giordano Bruno - Philosopher, Martyr, Inquisition: In August 1591, at the invitation of the Venetian patrician Giovanni Mocenigo, Bruno made the fatal move of returning to Italy. At the time, such a move did not seem to be too much of a risk: Venice was by far the most liberal of the Italian...

www.britannica.com

well i can easily sympathize w/Bruno Mr Toob.....and the analogy doesn't escape me in that the 'status quo' would well have condemned us both for views against them...~S~