by neufer » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:07 pm
geckzilla wrote:Star*Hopper wrote:
Yesterday's 'teaser' showed today's APOD's subject matter was simply, "
62".
I can't find any connection, other'n RCW 86's general declination of -
62°, which seems a bit of a reach (no pun intended).
What'm I missing? (& let's not try the nephelococcygiaic connection....it just
ain't there!)
Probably a mistake. Might not be, though. You'll never know...
- Perhaps it was a red herring or a Freudian slip.
http://www.theatricaloutfit.org/blog/h-freud-vs-lewis wrote:
Q: What was Sigmund Freud deathly afraid of? This fear even affected where he felt comfortable staying.
A: The answer is the number
62! It’s true that Freud also had pteridophobia, a morbid fear of ferns. But the phobia that affected where he felt comfortable staying was his deathly fear of the number
62: this phobia was so intense that he would not book a room in any hotel with more than
62 rooms in case he was allotted that particular room.
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~amtower/uncanny.html wrote:
THE UNCANNY
by Sigmund Freud
- "If we take another class of things, it is easy to see that there, too, it is only this factor of involuntary repetition which surrounds what would otherwise by innocent enough with an uncanny atmosphere, and forces upon us the idea of something fateful and inescapable when otherwise we should have spoken only of ‘chance’. For instance, we naturally attach no importance to the event when we hand in an overcoat and get a cloakroom ticket with the number, let us say, 62; or when we find that our cabin on a ship bears that number. But the impression is altered if two such events, each in itself indifferent, happen close together — if we come across the number 62 several times in a single day, or if we begin to notice that everything which has a number — addresses, hotel rooms, compartments in railway trains — invariably has the same one, or at all events one which contains the same figures. We do feel this to be uncanny. And unless a man is utterly hardened and proof against the lure of superstition, he will be tempted to ascribe a secret meaning to this obstinate recurrence of a number; he will take it, perhaps, as an indication of the span of life allotted to him. Or suppose one is engaged in reading the works of the famous physiologist, Hering, and within the space of a few days receives two letters from two different countries, each from a person called Hering, though one has never before had any dealings with anyone of that name. Not long ago an ingenious scientist (Kammerer, 1919) attempted to reduce coincidences of this kind to certain laws, and so deprive them of their uncanny effect. I will not venture to decide whether he has succeeded or not."
http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?p=39 wrote:
19
26 - Sigmund Freud adopts J. Thomas Looney’s theory on the 17th Earl of Oxford. (One of Freud’s teachers, Theodor Meynert, had believed in Bacon as the true author.) Freud later confirmed this advocacy in 1935 with the revision of his Autobiographical Study.
Sigmund Freud: “
I no longer believe that… the actor from Stratford was the author of the works that have been ascribed to him. Since reading Shakespeare Identified by J. Thomas Looney, I am almost convinced that the assumed name conceals the personality of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford… The man of Stratford seems to have nothing at all to justify his claim, whereas Oxford has almost everything.”
1930 - Canon Gerald Rendall, Gladstone professor of Greek at Liverpool’s University College, publishes Shakespeare Sonnets and Edward de Vere –another book that influenced Sigmund Freud.
[quote="geckzilla"][quote="Star*Hopper"]
Yesterday's 'teaser' showed today's APOD's subject matter was simply, "[color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color]".
I can't find any connection, other'n RCW 86's general declination of -[color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color]°, which seems a bit of a reach (no pun intended). :wink:
What'm I missing? (& let's not try the nephelococcygiaic connection....it just [u]ain't[/u] [u]there[/u]!) :mrgreen:[/quote]
Probably a mistake. Might not be, though. You'll never know... ;)[/quote]
[list]Perhaps it was a [color=#FF0000][b]red herring[/b][/color] or a Freudian slip.[/list]
[quote=" http://www.theatricaloutfit.org/blog/h-freud-vs-lewis"]
Q: What was Sigmund Freud deathly afraid of? This fear even affected where he felt comfortable staying.
A: The answer is the number [color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color]! It’s true that Freud also had pteridophobia, a morbid fear of ferns. But the phobia that affected where he felt comfortable staying was his deathly fear of the number [color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color]: this phobia was so intense that he would not book a room in any hotel with more than [color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color] rooms in case he was allotted that particular room.[/quote]
[quote=" http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~amtower/uncanny.html"]
[c][size=150]THE UNCANNY[/size]
by Sigmund Freud[/c]
[list][i]"If we take another class of things, it is easy to see that there, too, it is only this factor of involuntary repetition which surrounds what would otherwise by innocent enough with an uncanny atmosphere, and forces upon us the idea of something fateful and inescapable when otherwise we should have spoken only of ‘chance’. For instance, we naturally attach no importance to the event when we hand in an overcoat and get a cloakroom ticket with the number, let us say, [color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color]; or when we find that our cabin on a ship bears that number. But the impression is altered if two such events, each in itself indifferent, happen close together — if we come across the number [color=#FF0000][b]62[/b][/color] several times in a single day, or if we begin to notice that everything which has a number — addresses, hotel rooms, compartments in railway trains — invariably has the same one, or at all events one which contains the same figures. We do feel this to be uncanny. And unless a man is utterly hardened and proof against the lure of superstition, he will be tempted to ascribe a secret meaning to this obstinate recurrence of a number; he will take it, perhaps, as an indication of the span of life allotted to him. Or suppose one is engaged in reading the works of the famous physiologist, [color=#FF0000][b]Hering[/b][/color], and within the space of a few days receives two letters from two different countries, each from a person called [color=#FF0000][b]Hering[/b][/color], though one has never before had any dealings with anyone of that name. Not long ago an ingenious scientist (Kammerer, 1919) attempted to reduce coincidences of this kind to certain laws, and so deprive them of their uncanny effect. I will not venture to decide whether he has succeeded or not."[/i][/list][/quote]
[quote=" http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?p=39"]
19[color=#FF0000][b]26[/b][/color] - Sigmund Freud adopts J. Thomas Looney’s theory on the 17th Earl of Oxford. (One of Freud’s teachers, Theodor Meynert, had believed in Bacon as the true author.) Freud later confirmed this advocacy in 1935 with the revision of his Autobiographical Study.
Sigmund Freud: “[b][i][color=#0000FF]I no longer believe that… the actor from Stratford was the author of the works that have been ascribed to him. Since reading Shakespeare Identified by J. Thomas Looney, I am almost convinced that the assumed name conceals the personality of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford… The man of Stratford seems to have nothing at all to justify his claim, whereas Oxford has almost everything.[/color][/i][/b]”
1930 - Canon Gerald Rendall, Gladstone professor of Greek at Liverpool’s University College, publishes Shakespeare Sonnets and Edward de Vere –another book that influenced Sigmund Freud.[/quote]