And a Rose by any other name stinks just the same!

spatha (plural spathas)

1. A type of straight sword originating from 1st century Roman Empire. It was worn typically by calvary officers and is a long version of the left shaped gladius.

[edit] Related terms

• spathe
• spade

[edit] References

http://www.romancoins.info/MilitaryEquipment-Attack.html

dph

"David killed Goliath with a sling, so a sling is also a weapon that can kill you."

And THEN he took Goliath's sword and chopped off his head.
dph

First at all what is a sword?
I am speaking about the sword as an effective weapon used in real war combat, so forget sports, collectionists, rpg games, Hollywood and Discovery Channel.
A sword is a light, long, thin and very sharp blade with a handle. It is used to cut bodies and armors into pieces without having body to body contact.
The proble is with what material build a one or more neter long thin and very sharp blade?
The only material that can fullfil this requirement is steel.
Iron is strong, but it is not flexible and can break easily. Is impossible to make a long thin blade with iron that doesn't break at the first hit on something hard.
Bronze, even more older than iron, is more effective for a sword. Bronze is stronger and more difficult to break. Cannons were made of bronze and not of iron. You only can find small cannons made of iron, a bigger iron cannon you never can find one, it exploded at the firat shot!
The problem with bronze is that the other guys have shields and armor made of iron and you cannot break or trespasse an iron shield or armor with bronze.

The conception of the sword is simple, even a cave man could have the idea and tried to do it. Any kid makes a sword with a piece of wood. Through time many peoples and civilizations had the same idea and made it in several ways, archeologists can find many, and Discovery Channels tells you the story and Hollywood makes the movie.
The question is simple, these "swords" had any use in real war and not Hollywood?

Without steel there is not a sword, it is only an ornament or something for sports.
A simple big club is much more effective, cheap and secure than a sword that is not made of steel. No soldier would be stupid enough, even soldiers are stupid, to go to combat with a weapon that had only few minutes of use. An who used one never was able to tell you the strory, he never returned from the battle.

No steel == No sword.

Quote - And THEN he took Goliath's sword and chopped off his head.

You see the Bible tells you  that.
The time when the David vs Goliath battle happened there were no Romans, no gladius, even Greeks with their bronze weapons have not existed yet

gentlemen, we cannot prove Kawecki wrong since he will not under any circumstances listen. it is useless to debate him as history has proven time and time again. facts, history etc mean nothing to him.

just walk away gentlemen and don't play his game.
(this is not an attack or trolling but simple observed fact)

"You see the Bible tells you  that.
The time when the David vs Goliath battle happened there were no Romans, no gladius, even Greeks with their bronze weapons have not existed yet"

Yes, but then I trust the Hebrew Bible as a source of Historical documentation.  Living in the land of its Historic Roots has taught that there is much more truth to what is written within than most European Sceptics think.

BTW, bronze as a tool maker was already in use during the time of Abraham the Patriarch, 700 years before the reigns of King Saul and King David.
dph

Some curiosities.
Have you seen that in the movies Greeks, Persians, Babilonians, Egypcians use the same weapons, the same armor and the same uniforms. Even the Incas do it with some feathers added!
And the Romans... Everyone knows very well the Roman uniform, the breast plate, nude arms and the short shirts and sandals, something very effective for the Galia nd Germany campain with 15 or 20 degree Celsius below zero and don't forget that time to time Rome is also covered with snow, very good for senator's togas and sandals....

Some curiosity from the Bible.
There is a part that tells something like this: "... and the bear will eat together with the lambs"
Some questions. Have existed bears in ancient Israel or Palestina? Does it mean that the bear will eat grass? And before the bear was pacified it ate lambs?

And Daniel in the lion's cave!, of course lion is and must be a very dangerous and aggressive beast.
The question is, from where the Hell lions appeared there?, have escaped from a Roman circus, perhaps?

And something to meditate. Have you considered that lions and other beasts used in the Roman circus were trained pets and not hungry savage beasts?
Think well, the circus was a show for people as TV is today....

No, but I've read the Five Books of Moses in the original Hebrew, the book of Joshua & Judges, and also the both Books of Kings.  The ancient Israelites, Canaanites, Jeubusites, and Phoenicians knew what bronze was.
dph
PS: Since you're asking so many questions, could you answer this one for me?  Who the heck is Grendel, and from where did he come from?

Grendel? Who or what is he/she/it ?

Beowulf.
dph

I just read in Wikipedia. I didn't know the tale. The only thing that knew about Beowulf is that is a movie that I have not watched yet, probably shall like it.

Beowulf is an Old English heroic epic poem of unknown authorship, dating as recorded in the Nowell Codex manuscript from between the 8th[1][2] and the early 11th century,[3] set in Denmark and Sweden. Commonly cited as one of the most important works of Anglo-Saxon literature, Beowulf has been the subject of much scholarly study, theory, speculation, discourse, and, at 3182 lines, has been noted for its length.

In the poem, Beowulf, a hero of the Geats, battles three antagonists: Grendel, who has been attacking the resident warriors of a mead hall called Heorot in Denmark; Grendel's mother; and an unnamed dragon. The last battle takes place later in life, after returning to Geatland (modern southern Sweden), where Beowulf has become king. In the final battle, Beowulf is fatally wounded. After his death his retainers bury him in a tumulus in Geatland.

I know very little about Saxon literature and most of it from movies, in other words, I know nothing and the few that I know is wrong.

We had a flaming club round here once.  The owner had a disagreement with a local gang.  

An angel with a flaming club didn't look very nice when you had knights, magic excalibur, lord and kings and cavalry with nice swords.
Well,.. today an angel with a flaming sword and horsemen looks very ridiculous and primitive too.
Don't worry, soon history will repeat itself one more time and so you will read:
"Angels with flaming AK-47 riding an IED-resistant vehicle"
And why not, "Angel throwing a flaming photon torpedo"
You see, we've returned to the photon again, life is a circle...

"Angels with flaming AK-47 riding an IED-resistant vehicle"
And why not, "Angel throwing a flaming photon torpedo"

You wouldn't be referring to the motorcycle gang 'Hell's Angels' would you?
dph

Mirrors have always disturbed me, even from a young age.  Of course, at that age my misgivings were entirely intuitive, but I've since come to understand the philosophical and metaphysical underpinnings of my unease.

Consider what you're seeing "in the mirror."  We create representational reality (to use Kantian language) from our sense perceptions, interpreted through schema created from our experience and induction.  When we look at another person, the reality of that person can be placed in that external person (that is, the person-in-himself, again using Kantian terminology) through our understanding that we can assume the existence of knowledge based on certain axiomatic assumptions which must be true in order for knowledge itself to exist -- which was the point of the CoPR.

Good so far.

The problem comes when I look in a mirror and see myself.  I am very clearly not seeing me, since I am aware, when I am perceiving the qualia from the mirrors reflection, that I am not present in the mirror.  What, then, is the reality of the mirror -- that is, the dasein (to use Heidegger's term) of the person I'm perceiving?  The frightening conclusion is that I am literally perceiving the alienated self, the existential doppelganger.  I am astounded that people use mirrors every day, that they have them all over their homes without the slightest qualm, despite the terrible alien presence within them.  To look into the mirror is to come quite literally face to face with some of the most horrible existential verities of our existence.

Mirrors atract thunder, so when there is a storm you must cover all the mirrors in your house.
(I am using the language of people from the country, here...)

I just love thread drift. :lol: 

@ HeWHo Watches -

If it's any consolation there is now solid scientific evidence that mirrors (or at least the image therein) can be distinguished from "reality", due to the discovery of a subatonic particle which can only exist in one version (for the sake of argument, consider it a "right handed" particle).  Therefore, since the left handed version cannot exist in nature, a detailed analysis of a reflection would reveal its true nature.

If it's citations and references you want to verify this, check out "The God Particle - the search for the Higg's Boson".

Left handed particle is demoniac.

God created the light and Devil made the darkness.
As 95% of the matter in the Universe is dark matter the Universe is ruled by Lucifer.

Quote - God created the light and Devil made the darkness.
As 95% of the matter in the Universe is dark matter the Universe is ruled by Lucifer.

If anything it's the other way around.  Lucifer means "light-bringer."  Lucifer is actually a heroic figure, and is celebrated in every religion except christianity -- the only ones who celebrate ignorance.  The light-bringer figure is the one who brings fire (that is, power and knowledge) to humanity by stealing it from the gods, and is punished by the gods for doing so.  The Greeks had the titan Prometheus, the First Nations had Coyote, et al.  Humanity, according to Genesis, were created deliberately ignorant and condemned to be Yahweh's contented lapdogs for all eternity until the Serpent convinced them to eat of the Tree of Knowledge.  Interestingly, this isn't why Yahweh cast humanity out of the Garden:

*And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." * [Genesis 3:22 NIV]

In other words, the Serpent convinced humanity to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, and now Yahweh is worried that with this knowledge they may make themselves gods in their own right by becoming immortal and as great as he.  The Serpent is humanity's saviour, and is punished like Prometheus by being cast into the Lake of Fire to burn for all eternity.

(Interestingly, Jesus refers to himself as the "Morningstar," one of Lucifer's titles.  The Gnostic interpretation of the Bible is that Yahweh is actually quite an evil entity, and that he's merely a groundskeeper for the true Creator -- who will one day return and be mighty pissed to discover Yahweh has been populating the Earth with these nasty little human things made in Yahweh's flawed and brutish image.  As support for this the Gnostics note that Genesis uses two different terms for "God": the first creates the heavens and the Earth, while the second -- that is, the "Voice of God" -- goes walking in the Garden.  This second would be Yahweh, the Demi-Urge, and the one against whom Lucifer rebels, saving humanity from him.)

Yahweh is a demiurg that thinks he is God.
"Voice of God" I liked it, something like Bush?...

Hmmmm.  Don't want to get into a theology discussion.  Sam ... as far as mirrors and torches/flashlights.  Isn't it all based on the the perspective of the viewer? Muliple views are irrelevent.  It's just a different perspective.  Perhaps I haven't fully understood.  I have monocular vision, (I only see out of one eye) therefore I see as a camera sees which is in 2d in constant flux.  When looking at any visual analysis it's all based on visual perseption rather than any absolutes.  The viewers visual field, acuity, depth perseption, even color perseption is individual.  Optical illutions can't be seen by everyone the same way.  For instance, I cannot nor have I ever been able to see the "magic-eye" images because I can't see in 3d.  So you see I've analyzed the heck out of this and probably don't understand your original observation at all. ;)
Boni

By the way ... love the guitar.  Wish I could get my partner to open her christmas present (a guitar she doesn't think we can afford or that she deserves!)

Boni

Boni - Nope, no and neyaw.  Perspecive is nowt to do wee it if you're counting photons.  Kawecki kinda got a grip of it but threw it away by saying photons are waves (they aren't) and the rest of the world threw it away by saying photons are particles (they aren't) so we are left saying what the hell are photons?  And why don't I get invited to their parties and why don't all the girls I know want to get naked?

Oh no, that last bit is just me.  You can pretend it's photons if you like. 

I forgot to mention - pickled onions.

Now go and read Crowley's "The Book of Lies"  and tell me I don't know what I'm saying.  It's the most honest book you will ever read. 

Much more fun than with mirrors is with a piece of glass.
With glass some light pass trough (is refracted), some light is absorved and some light bounce back (is reflected), the amount of each case depend on the glass material.
The question is:

• How does a photon know that it must pass through the glass or be reflected?
• How a photon knows what did the previous photon to meet the requirement, for example, 90% transparent glass.
• God is playing dice, again?

Much worst, what happens also depend on the incidence angle. For some angle all light is reflected and none pass trough, a window turns into a perfect mirror.
And for other angle none light is reflected. The glass is the same, its material is the same, but how the glass behaves, change.
How a photon knows what to do and how can we calculate what it will do. ????

More fun with mirrors.
A photon has a momentum P = m.c. When a photon hit a mirror the photon is reflected, what happens with the momentum?
As the speed of light is always the same the magnitude of the momentum remain the same, but momentum is a vector and the direction was changed when reflected, so the vector momentum has changed.
A Newton's principle tell us that force is the change of momentun per unit time F = dp/dt.
The consequence of all this is when photons hit a mirror it appears a force at the mirror's surface, the mirror is stoned by photons!

Some colateral effects:
We trigger a very powerful Regan's Star War laser to destroy and incoming Persian ICBM or if you prefer a Korean one. The laser beam hit a space satellite reflector to be reflected exactly to where is the missile. You can use several ground lasers for increase the power of the destructive beam.
What happens? The laser beam hit the mirror, the beams are reflected toward the target, photons hit the mirror, a reaction force appears in the satellite mirror and the satellite is put out of orbit, more powerful the laser more the satellite goes to who knows where.
In resume, all these Star War's gizmo works only for one shot, don't miss the only one opportunity you have and of course, against only one missile......