From: bil@burka..aix.kingston.ibm.com (Igor Belchinskiy)
Subject: Re: Lev Gumilev, was "democratic" Estonia
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 16:13:41 GMT
Organization: Be. I am.

In article <17uvatINNf6l@agate.berkeley.edu> muh@physics1 (Yury M. Mukharsky) writes:

>

seems it's time to go "private e-mail". so this is my last news reply on this
subject

And: my "boiling" of Gumilev's theories maybe/is different from
his own. Facts are the same (his, of course :-). But as level of 
generalization (and distance from atomic facts) increases, differencies arose. 

>>Theory - ages of ethnoses, and typical behaviour of ethnos at given age.
>
>Classification I got, as I said. Ages of ethnoses and typical behaviour
>is classification. It is not new, idea of old nation and young nation
>is by no means new.

IMHO, there is a difference between just speculative idea of an old 
and new nation and detailed and serious results by Gumilev.
The same as between a little child who knows there are adults also
and distinguished psychologist who ate dogs on them (or "soup from thrown
away boiled childs").

I don't know who else had this results:
>>Prediction of longevity of ethnos life and epoches and typical
>>tendencies in ethnos lifes.

>No, it is not. If give me statistics, showing that this is most common
>age, i would agree.

Kind of statistics is in EBM. BTW, you should know that statistics can prove
anything (e.g. look at Fomenko).

>To answer your example with two counterexamples I
>would mention Americans (much younger) and Jews (much older).
Again EBM: Americans really are branch of European ethnos - and so they
are as old as Europe (and as tired).
With Jews it may be a little complicated. We can see that Jews of Bible
and thousand years later don't contradict Gumilev's theory (IMHO, as usual).
What happened with Jews after that may be out of bounds of his theory 
applicability - age of their ethnos is too old.  I have some very
speculative ideas for private use - but I'm not a scholar and there is
no reason to post them.

>>I didn't got it that way. Maybe the law of dissipation of ethnos energy - 
>>but not the conservation - and especially not the physics law of 
>>energy conservation.
>
>Here goes:
>" But ethnogenesis is a process, revealing it self in a work (in physical
>sense). Are accomplished: wars, buildings of temples and palaces, 
>landscape changes, oppression of dissidents inside and outside of the
>system under creation. But for work to be done energy is required, usual
>energy, measured in kilogrammometers or calories..."
>     Lev Gumilev, "Geographia ethonsa w istoricheskij period".

So what? You missed why I decided to mention XVIII mechanicist energy in
one of previous postings - you are trying to simplify to much the same
way as physics at that time tried to reduce everything to simple
mechanic.
Look: "But life of a human is a process, revealing it self in a work (in 
physical sense). Are accomplished: fightings, building of house,
gardening, political activity. But for work to be done energy is
required, usual energy, measured in kilogrammometers or calories..."
But the same question of "energetic man" remains? What is it? Or maybe
you know how to measure human energy in calories?
>
>>
>>You may think of Gumilev as psychologist of ethoses. He answered question
>>how, and propose his ideas about why.
>
>How?

A tale of white veal.

>>What's more, you can apply his rules to current world and be able
>>to understand, e.g. what's happens globally in Arab world 
>>(so quiet 100 years ago).
>
>Again, no sarcasm, how? I usually try to believe widely recognised
>scientist, but not blindely. That is after all as science works.
>
He himself very seldom (if ever) speaks of current and future.
But, if I didn't misinterpret what I understand from EBM and applied
that without serious errors, seems Arabian world is going to create
new superethnos. So it would boil more and more before creating it's own
empire, it would try to bring it's ideology (fundamental islam) outside
as only ideology and style of life that has right to exist in the world 
and hopes for peace with Arabs in Israel seems for me rather mystic.
Anyway, we'll see.

>>
>>How should you answer? [what's energetic man]
>
>Am I suppose to? It is not a scientific argument: "What other solution
>you may propose?". The only case that works is when in mathematics you
>gives counterexample. Like if you will find that x**a+y**a=c**a for
>a>2, that will be the end of Great Ferma theorem. (I hope I did not
>forget my high school math :) ).

You are supposed to. Or you should agree there things you may see
but can't explain. And that doesn't mean these things do not exist.
IMHO, this is your case vs. Gumilev.
Next question - how you may know something is true, if you can't explain it?
I believe this is not for t.p.s. - 
or wait for Little Green Bear (Mishutka Zelenyi) - he should return from
Paris/Moon soon. 
>>
>Yury
>
Igor

Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet