Judaism, Now and Then

Please note that I do not pretend to be an expert on Judaism. I'm just a knowledgeable amateur, an armchair historian and cultural anthropologist, as it were. I'm not even Jewish. I'm nominally Episcopalian, but for an Episcopalian, I am probably as close to being Jewish as any Gentile is likely to get without actually converting. I considered it because I think that Judaism is a lot more forgiving and less rigid than Christianity, but the way that Israel has been behaving toward the Palestinians, I could not, in all good conscience, throw my hat in with Israel, so there goes my conversion. Anyway....

I read an article in Yahoo News today about Jewish men in prison, written by a Jewish man who had gone to prison, so I guess he would know. And he talked, in this article, about the Lubavitchers, the Bobovers, the Sephardim, the Falasha, the Satmars and the Sabras, and I am thinking, "What the hell are those???"

So I looked them up. A Lubavitcher is a follower of a certain Orthodox Hasidic sect. They are, according to the Online Dictionary, formerly Eastern European, optimistic and hospitable missionaries who stress the importance of studying the Torah and/or the Talmud. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. A Bobover is a follower of another peaceful Hasidic sect who follow the teachings of a particular dynasty of rabbis from another Eastern European village. (I really should have written down which villages these sects came from, but I didn't, and my computer connection has been sketchy.)  The Sephardim are Jews from Southern Europe. "Falasha" refers derogatorily to Ethiopian Jews. The Satmars follow the teachings of yet another strictly Orthodox Hasidic sect, from yet another rabbinic dynasty from yet another Eastern European village, and they tend to be very antagonistic toward other Jewish sects, anti-Zionists, and anti-assimilation.

While back in the day, two thousand years ago, there were the Sadducees (Tzaddikim), the Pharisees (Perushim), the Essenes (Hasidim), the Zealots (the Malkhut beit David), the followers of John the Baptist (Mandaeans), and the Nazarenes (Notzrim), today, there are other groups, as there are many streams that flow into the river that leads to God, and ever has it been thus. The Hasidim have changed considerably from the days when they were all New Age-y, environmentalist, and touchy-feely.  Now, they are a distinctly clannish part of the Orthodox movement, which is kind of like being an extremist version of Evangelistic Christianity or radical Islam. There is also the Conservative movement, the Reform movement, the Reconstructionist movement and the Humanistic Judaism movement. All of these movements reflect certain philosophies that try to answer the question of God's existence, how people can best get close to and serve God, how to further the cause of civilization, and how to make the world a better place.

On Beer and Urine and a Little Off-Topic

So there was an article on Yahoo News yesterday, which I finally got around to reading this morning, about how scientists think that they have discovered that the stones destined for the pyramids of Giza were moved because water was poured on the sand in front of them as they were hauled along, otherwise the sand would bunch up. (And for this bit of insight, they had to earn a PhD, first.)

Yeah, but water?  Water is a little hard to come by in the desert, even one that was a little wetter some 3500 years ago.

On the other hand, you know what was easier to come by? Beer and its byproduct, urine. Those ancient Egyptian construction workers drank lots of beer, and even went on strike because they objected to being denied their quota. The resulting urine was free, easily internally-transported by individuals until needed, and could be gathered into pots and urns and poured out at some designated place. And the thousands of Egyptian workers would produce an almost infinite amount of urine, all for free. (And we have already determined that free is good, even 3500 years ago.)

So my questions de jour are: What are the chemical effects of beer on urine; are the sands of the Egyptian desert different in chemical composition from the sands of, say, your average beach; what are the chemical effects of urine on the sands of the Egyptian desert; and would beer-laced urine, poured onto Egyptian sand, produce any chemical changes that would improve one's ability to pull heavy objects across said sand, as compared to water? If, for instance, the ammonia crystals in the urine reacts to the silicon or kaolin of the sand, does this result in a temporary binding of the crystals which makes for a smoother road, at least until the ammonia has thoroughly evaporated?  If so, this could solve the riddle that has plagued Egyptologists and other interested parties for ages.

So, one at a time.

1.     What are the chemical effects of beer on urine?

2.     Are the sands of the Egyptian desert different in chemical composition than other kinds of sand?

3.     What are the chemical effects of urine on the sands of the Egyptian desert?

4.     Would beer-laced urine, poured onto Egyptian sand, produce any chemical changes that would improve one's ability to pull heavy objects across it?

If anybody with knowledge of chemistry should happen to know the answers to these questions, I would be happy to hear from you in the comment section.